Evaluation of eating habits by 7-day food record: web-PC vs. traditional paper format.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the validity of a web-based 7-day food-record using METADIETA-web link (Meteda s.r.l.) - a professional software used in nutritional practice and research - compared with the traditional paper format. Twenty-six healthy adults of both sexes were recruited in this cross-over study based on the number coming from the sample size calculation, and randomly assigned to start with METADIETA-web or traditional 7-Day Food-Diary. All the 7-day food-diaries were recorded in the Metadieta-software. The System Usability Scale (SUS) questionnaire was administered to evaluate the participants' preferences in terms of usability, acceptability, and feasibility. Differences in energy intake, nutrient composition, and SUS between the digital and traditional modalities were evaluated. Energy and nutrients were not significantly different between the two methods with a variation <15%, with alcohol intake showing the strongest relation (0.1% variation). The Interclass Correlation Coefficient showed a grade of consistency between the two methods excellent for alcohol, good for proteins, carbohydrates, and fibre, moderate for energy and saturated fat, and poor for total fat and cholesterol. SUS suggested that the web-based platform was in general well accepted, but highlighted some inconsistencies and complexity compared to the written food diary. The web-based 7-day food-record may allow an accurate and quicker analysis of food timing than conventional approaches, seeming reliable for energy and macronutrient composition, making it a potentially attractive tool for nutritional research. However, the reported inconsistencies and complexity must be considered and addressed.

Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies.

Evidence of associations between ultra-processed foods (UPF) and increased risk of cardiovascular disease is emerging, but it is unclear how much this is influenced by the methodology used to assess the UPF intake or by the level of consumption. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate 1) the association between UPF consumption and risk of diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and obesity, using prospective cohort studies; 2) the differential associations depending on the methodology used to assess UPF intake and the level of UPF consumption and 3) the quality of evidence using the NutriGrade scoring system. A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, and Scopus through 1 April, 2023, on studies conducted in humans providing data for the highest compared with the lowest UPF consumption categories. Summary relative ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated using a random-effects model. Out of 4522 articles retrieved from the literature search, 25 reports met the criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis, 7 for diabetes, 5 for hypertension, 3 for dyslipidemia, and 13 for obesity. A consistently positive association between high UPF intake and increased risk of developing diabetes (37%), hypertension (32%), hypertriglyceridemia (47%), low HDL cholesterol concentration (43%), and obesity (32%) was observed, even if the quality of evidence was not satisfying. However, these risks varied significantly depending on the methodology used to assess UPF consumption, with a difference of more than 50% between the methods. Based on the level of intake, we did not observe significant differences in the results. These findings show that UPF consumption is associated with higher risk of diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and obesity, but the level of risk consistently changes depending on the methodology used to assess UPF intake. Therefore, caution should be used when interpreting and extrapolating the results.