The use of food processing terminology in Australian news media: a content analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine whether ultra-processed foods (UPFs) are being discussed in news media in Australia and whether this terminology, as described in the NOVA system, is being applied accurately. DESIGN: Interpretive content analysis of online and print media articles that mentioned UPFs from 2009 to 2023 in Australia. SETTING: Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Online and print media articles. RESULTS: A total of two hundred ninety-eight Australian media articles were captured. A substantial increase in the number of UPF articles was observed between 2017-2019 and 2021-2023. The UPF concept was inaccurately explained or defined in 32 % of the articles and was frequently used interchangeably with other descriptors, such as 'highly or heavily processed food', 'junk food', 'unhealthy food', 'packaged food' and 'discretionary food'. Most of the articles had a health focus; however, sustainability interest increased, particularly in the past 18 months. CONCLUSIONS: UPFs are increasingly being discussed in news media in Australia; however, the concept is still incorrectly presented in over a third of articles. This highlights the importance of improving the literacy about UPFs to ensure that messages are communicated in a way that is salient, accessible and accurate.

Profiling ultra-processed foods in Thailand: sales trend, consumer expenditure and nutritional quality.

BACKGROUND: Ultra-processed foods (UPF) are associated with adverse health outcomes. This study aimed to analyse the national trends in retail sales, consumer expenditure and nutritional quality of UPFs in Thailand. METHODS: The study used data from the Euromonitor Passport database for analysis of retail sales and consumer expenditure, and from the Mintel Global New Products Database for nutritional analysis using the WHO Southeast Asian Region nutrient profile model. RESULTS: The study found the highest per capita sales volume and value of UPFs in 2021 were sauces, dressings & condiments (8.4 kg/capita) and carbonated soft drinks (27.1 L/capita), respectively. However, functional & flavoured water, ready-made meals and baked goods had the highest observed (2012-2021) and expected (2021-2026) sales growth. Supermarkets were responsible for most of the UPF sales since 2012, but convenience stores had larger growth in retail values. Growth in consumer expenditure per capita on UPFs from 2012 to 2020, ranged between 12.7% and 34%, and till 2026 is forecast to grow between 26% and 30%. More than half of UPFs exceeded at least one nutrient cutoff, 59.3% for total fats, 24.8% for saturated fats, 68.2% for total sugars and 94.3% for sodium. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest a need for regulatory and non-regulatory measures such as UPF taxation and marketing restrictions, and market incentives for producing non-UPFs. A system for regularly monitoring and evaluating healthiness (both nutritional and processing aspects) of food products, especially UPFs, is required.

Corrigendum: A novel food processing-based nutrition classification scheme for guiding policy actions applied to the Australian food supply.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2023.1071356.].

Choosing an effective food classification system for promoting healthy diets in Thailand: a comparative evaluation of three nutrient profiling-based food classification systems (government, WHO, and Healthier Choice Logo) and a food-processing-based food classification system (NOVA).

Introduction: This study aimed to assess the nutritional quality of food and beverage products in Thailand by comparing four different food classification systems: the nutrient profiling-based food classification systems by the Department of Health (DOH), the WHO South-East Asia Region (WHO SEA), the Healthier Choice Logo (HCL), and the food-processing-based food classification system, NOVA. Methods: This study used secondary data from the Mintel Global New Products Database (N = 17,414). Food subgroups were classified differently based on these four systems. The DOH classified food products into three groups: Group A-healthy pass or meeting standard, Group B-not meeting the standard, and Group C-far below standard. The WHO SEA classified food products into two groups: marketing prohibited products and marketing permitted products. The HCL classified food products into two groups: eligible products for the logo; and ineligible products for the logo. The NOVA classified food products into four groups: unprocessed or minimally processed foods (MP), processed culinary ingredients (PCI), processed foods (P), and ultra-processed foods (UPF). Descriptive statistics (percentage and frequency) were used for analysis. Agreement analysis was conducted using Cohen's kappa statistic between each pair of food classification systems. Results: Of the total sample that could be classified by any of the four classification systems (n = 10,486), the DOH, the WHO SEA and the HCL systems classified products as healthy (Group A, marketing permitted or eligible for HCL logo) at 10.4, 11.1, and 10.9%, respectively. Only 5.6% were classified as minimally processed foods using NOVA and 83.1% were ultra-processed foods (UPFs). Over 50% of products classified as healthy by the nutrient profiling systems were classified as UPF according to the NOVA system. Products that were eligible for the HCL had the highest proportion of UPF products (84.4%), followed by the Group A products (69.2%) and the WHO marketing-permitted products (65.0%). Conclusion: A hybrid food classification approach taking both nutrients and food processing into account is needed to comprehensively assess the nutritional quality of food and beverage products in Thailand.

A novel food processing-based nutrition classification scheme for guiding policy actions applied to the Australian food supply.

Unhealthy diets are a leading risk factor for non-communicable diseases and negatively impact environmental sustainability. Policy actions recommended to address dietary risk factors, such as restrictions on marketing and front-of-pack labelling, are informed by nutrition classification schemes (NCSs). Ultra-processed foods are associated with adverse population and planetary health outcomes, yet the concept is rarely incorporated in nutrition classification schemes for policy actions. This study aims to develop a novel food processing-based nutrition classification scheme for guiding policy actions. A secondary aim is to validate the scheme by classifying food and beverage items in the Australian food supply (face validity) and comparing them to the classifications of existing NCSs (convergent validity). Two versions of a model were developed, classifying foods and beverages in two steps, first using the NOVA classification system and secondly by applying upper thresholds for added free sugars and sodium, producing a binary output of either healthy or unhealthy. All food and beverage items (n = 7,322) in a dataset combining the Australian Food Composition Database (AUSNUT 2011-2013) and Mintel's Global New Product Database (2014-2019) were classified using the two models. The same dataset was also classified by the Health Star Rating system (HSR), The Australian Dietary Guidelines (ADGs), The Pan American Health Organization's Nutrient Profile Model (PAHO NPM), and the NOVA classification scheme, and pairwise agreement between all NCSs and the two models was determined (using Cohen's Kappa coefficient). A higher proportion of food categories consistent with dietary patterns that are associated with positive health outcomes, such and fruits, vegetables, and eggs were classified as healthy. And the clear majority of food categories consistent with dietary patterns associated with adverse health outcomes, such as confectionery, snack foods, and convenience foods were classified as unhealthy. The two versions of the model showed substantial agreement with NOVA and the PAHO NPM, fair agreement with the ADGs and slight to moderate agreement with the HSR system. A model NCS combining level of processing and nutrient criteria presents a valid alternative to existing methods to classify the health potential of individual foods for policy purposes.

Measuring Adherence to Sustainable Healthy Diets: A Scoping Review of Dietary Metrics.

Comprehensive metrics that provide a measure of dietary patterns at global and national levels are needed to inform and assess the effectiveness of policy actions that promote sustainable healthy diets. In 2019, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the World Health Organization reported 16 guiding principles of sustainable healthy diets, but it is still unknown how these principles are considered in dietary metrics. This scoping review aimed to explore how principles of sustainable healthy diets are considered in dietary metrics used worldwide. Forty-eight food-based, investigator-defined dietary pattern metrics assessing diet quality in free-living, healthy populations at the individual or household level were assessed against the 16 guiding principles of sustainable healthy diets, which was used as a theoretical framework. A strong adherence of the metrics to health-related guiding principles was found. Metrics had a weak adherence to principles related to environmental and sociocultural aspects of diets, except for the principle related to diets being culturally appropriate. No existing dietary metric captures all principles of sustainable healthy diets. Notably, the significance food processing, environmental, and sociocultural aspects of diets are generally understated. This likely reflects the lack of focus on these aspects in current dietary guidelines, which highlights the importance of including these emerging topics in future dietary recommendations. The absence of quantitative metrics that comprehensively measure sustainable healthy diets limits the body of evidence that would otherwise inform national and international guideline developments. Our findings can help grow the quantity and quality of the body of evidence available to inform policy activities to realize 2030 Sustainable Development Goals of multiple United Nations. Adv Nutr 2022;x:xx.

Nutrition Classification Schemes for Informing Nutrition Policy in Australia: Nutrient-Based, Food-Based, or Dietary-Based?

Background: Policy makers are increasingly using nutrition classification schemes (NCSs) to assess a food's health potential for informing nutrition policy actions. However, there is wide variability among the NCSs implemented and no standard benchmark against which their contrasting assessments can be validated. Objectives: This study aimed to compare the agreement of nutrient-, food-, and dietary-based NCSs in their assessment of a food's health potential within the Australian food supply, and examine the conceptual underpinnings and technical characteristics that explain differences in performance. Methods: A dataset combining food compositional data from the Mintel Global New Products Database and the Australian Food Composition Database (AUSNUT 2011-2012) (n = 7322) was assembled. Products were classified by 7 prominent NCSs that were selected as representative of one or other of 1) nutrient-based NCSs [the Chilean nutrient profile model (NPM), Health Star Rating (HSR), Nutri-Score, the WHO European Region's NPM (WHO-Euro NPM), and the Pan American Health Organization's (PAHO) NPM]; 2) food-based NCS (NOVA), and 3) dietary-based NCS [Australian Dietary Guidelines (ADGs)]. Results: The PAHO NPM classified the lowest proportion (22%) of products as "healthy", and the HSR the highest (63%). The PAHO NPM, NOVA, WHO-Euro NPM, and the Chilean NPM classified >50% of products as "unhealthy," and the ADGs, HSR, and Nutri-Score classified <50% of products as "unhealthy." The HSR and Nutri-Score had the highest pairwise agreement (κ = 0.7809, 89.70%), and the PAHO NPM and HSR the lowest (κ = 0.1793, 53.22%). Characteristics of NCSs that more effectively identified ultraprocessed and discretionary foods were: category-specific assessment, the classification of categories as always "healthy" or "unhealthy," consideration of level of food processing, thresholds for "risk" nutrients that do not penalize whole foods; and no allowance for the substitution of ingredients. Conclusions: Wide variation was observed in agreement of the assessment of a food's health potential among the NCSs analyzed due to differing conceptual underpinnings and technical characteristics.

Evaluating intake levels of nutrients linked to non-communicable diseases in Australia using the novel combination of food processing and nutrient profiling metrics of the PAHO Nutrient Profile Model.

PURPOSE: To investigate intake levels of nutrients linked to non-communicable diseases in Australia using the novel combination of food processing and nutrient profiling metrics of the PAHO Nutrient Profile Model. METHODS: Dietary intakes of 12,153 participants from the Australian Health Survey (2011-12) aged 2 + years were evaluated. Food items reported during a 24 h recall were classified using the NOVA system. The Pan-American Health Organization Nutrient Profile Model (PAHO NPM) was applied to identify processed and ultra-processed products with excessive content of critical nutrients. Differences in mean intakes and prevalence of excessive intakes of critical nutrients for groups of the population whose diets were made up of products with and without excessive content in critical nutrients were examined. RESULTS: The majority of Australians consumed daily at least three processed and ultra-processed products identified as excessive in critical nutrients according to the PAHO NPM. Individuals consuming these products had higher intakes of free sugars (ß = 8.9), total fats (ß = 11.0), saturated fats (ß = 4.6), trans fats (ß = 0.2), and sodium (ß = 1788 for adolescents and adults; ß = 1769 for children 5-10 years; ß = 1319 for children aged < 5 years) (p ≤ 0.001 for all nutrients) than individuals not consuming these foods. The prevalence of excessive intake of all critical nutrients also followed the same trend. CONCLUSION: The PAHO NPM has shown to be a relevant tool to predict intake levels of nutrients linked to non-communicable diseases in Australia and, therefore, could be used to inform policy actions aimed at increasing the healthiness of food environments.

Does the Australian Health Star Rating System Encourage Added Sugar Reformulation? Trends in Sweetener Use in Australia.

Dietary risk factors, including excess added sugar intake, are leading contributors to Australia's burden of disease. An objective of the Australian Health Star Rating (HSR) system is to encourage the reformulation of packaged foods. Manufacturers may improve a product's HSR by replacing added sugar with non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS). Concerns have been raised regarding the potential substitution effects of ultra-processed foods containing NNS for whole foods, and the long-term impact this may have on population health. The aim of this study was to determine whether the implementation of the HSR system has impacted the use of added sugars and NNS in the food supply. Four product categories were used: products with no added sweetener, products containing added sugar only, products containing NNS only, and products containing a combination of added sugar and NNS. Of 6477 newly released products analyzed displaying a HSR in Australia between 2014-2020, 63% contained added sugars. The proportion of new products sweetened with added sugars increased over time, while NNS use did not, despite a higher average and median HSR for products sweetened with NNS. These findings suggest that at the current time, the HSR system may not discourage the use of added sugars in new products or incentivize the reformulation of added sugar with NNS. As the health risks of NNS are questioned, increased reformulation of products with NNS to reduce the presence of added sugar in the food supply may not address broader health concerns. Instead, supporting the promotion of whole foods and drinks should be prioritized, as well as policy actions that reduce the proliferation and availability of UPFs.

Evaluating Nutrient-Based Indices against Food- and Diet-Based Indices to Assess the Health Potential of Foods: How Does the Australian Health Star Rating System Perform after Five Years?

Nutrient-based indices are commonly used to assess the health potential of individual foods for nutrition policy actions. This study aimed to evaluate the nutrient profile-informed Australian Health Star Rating (HSR), against NOVA and an index informed by the Australian Dietary Guidelines (ADGs), to determine the extent of alignment. All products displaying an HSR label in the Australian marketplace between June 2014 and June 2019 were extracted from the Mintel Global New Product Database, and classified into one of four NOVA categories, and either as an ADG five food group (FFG) food or discretionary food. Of 4451 products analysed, 76.5% were ultra-processed (UP) and 43% were discretionary. The median HSR of non-UP foods (4) was significantly higher than UP foods (3.5) (p < 0.01), and the median HSR of FFG foods (4) was significantly higher than discretionary foods (2.5) (p < 0.01). However, 73% of UP foods, and 52.8% of discretionary foods displayed an HSR ≥ 2.5. Results indicate the currently implemented HSR system is inadvertently providing a 'health halo' for almost ¾ of UP foods and ½ of discretionary foods displaying an HSR. Future research should investigate whether the HSR scheme can be reformed to avoid misalignment with food-and diet-based indices.

Analysing the use of the Australian Health Star Rating system by level of food processing.

BACKGROUND: The consumption of ultra-processed foods is associated with diminished dietary quality and adverse health outcomes. The Australian Health Star Rating (HSR) is a nutrient-based front-of-pack (FOP) labelling system that assesses the 'healthiness' of foods on a scale of 0.5 to 5 stars based on their content of 'risk' and 'positive' nutrients. This study aimed to analyse the use of health stars on new packaged food products entering the Australian marketplace by level of food processing. METHODS: The Mintel Global New Product Database (GNPD) was searched to identify the number of stars displayed on the labels of all new packaged food products participating in the HSR system released into the Australian retail food supply between 27 June 2014 (the endorsement date) and 30 June 2017. Products were categorised by the four NOVA food processing categories: unprocessed and minimally processed (MP), processed culinary ingredients (PCI), processed (P), and ultra-processed (UP), and the distribution of the star ratings within each category was compared and analysed. RESULTS: The majority of new food products displaying an HSR were UP (74.4%), followed by MP (12.5%), P (11.6%), and PCI (1.5%). The median HSR of MP products (4.5) was significantly higher than the median of P (4) and UP products (3.5) (all p < 0.05). In all NOVA categories HSR profiles were distributed towards higher star ratings, and the majority (77%) of UP products displayed an HSR ≥ 2.5. CONCLUSIONS: The HSR is being displayed on a substantial proportion of newly released UP foods. Technical weaknesses, design flaws and governance limitations with the HSR system are resulting in 3 out of 4 instances of these UP foods displaying at least 2.5 so-called 'health' stars. These findings add further evidence to concerns that the HSR system, in its current form, is misrepresenting the healthiness of new packaged food products and creating a risk for behavioural nutrition.

Do Nutrient-Based Front-of-Pack Labelling Schemes Support or Undermine Food-Based Dietary Guideline Recommendations? Lessons from the Australian Health Star Rating System.

Food-based Dietary Guidelines (FBDGs) promote healthy dietary patterns. Nutrient-based Front-of-Pack Labelling (NBFOPL) schemes rate the 'healthiness' of individual foods. This study aimed to investigate whether the Australian Health Star Rating (HSR) system aligns with the Australian Dietary Guidelines (ADGs). The Mintel Global New Products Database was searched for every new food product displaying a HSR entering the Australian marketplace from 27 June 2014 (HSR system endorsement) until 30 June 2017. Foods were categorised as either a five food group (FFG) food or 'discretionary' food in accordance with ADG recommendations. Ten percent (1269/12,108) of new food products displayed a HSR, of which 57% were FFG foods. The median number of 'health' stars displayed on discretionary foods (2.5; range: 0.5-5) was significantly lower (p < 0.05) than FFG foods (4.0; range: 0.5-5), although a high frequency of anomalies and overlap in the number of stars across the two food categories was observed, with 56.7% of discretionary foods displaying ≥2.5 stars. The HSR system is undermining the ADG recommendations through facilitating the marketing of discretionary foods. Adjusting the HSR's algorithm might correct certain technical flaws. However, supporting the ADGs requires reform of the HSR's design to demarcate the food source (FFG versus discretionary food) of a nutrient.

Utility of a single early warning score in patients with sepsis in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: An important element in improving the care of patients with sepsis is early identification and early intervention. Early warning score (EWS) systems allow earlier identification of physiological deterioration. A standardised national EWS (NEWS) has been proposed for use across the National Health Service in the UK. AIM: To determine whether a single NEWS on emergency department (ED) arrival is a predictor of outcome, either in-hospital death within 30 days or intensive care unit (ICU) admission within 2 days, in patients with sepsis. METHODS: Data were collected over a 3-month period as part of a national audit in 20 EDs in Scotland. All adult patients who were admitted for at least 2 days or who died within 2 days were screened for sepsis criteria. Patients with  systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria were included. An EWS was calculated based on initial physiological observations made in the ED using the NEWS. RESULTS: Complete data were available for 2003 patients. Each rise in NEWS category was associated with an increased risk of mortality when compared to the lowest category (5-6: OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.21 to 3.14), (7-8: OR 2.26, 95% CI 1.42 to 3.61), (9-20: OR 5.64, 95% CI 3.70 to 8.60). This was also the case for the combined outcome (ICU and/or mortality). CONCLUSIONS: An increased NEWS on arrival at ED is associated with higher odds of adverse outcome among patients with sepsis. The use of NEWS could facilitate patient pathways to ensure triage to a high acuity area of the ED and senior clinician involvement at an early stage.

The epidemiology of adults with severe sepsis and septic shock in Scottish emergency departments.

BACKGROUND: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) promotes a bundle approach to the care of septic patients to improve outcome. Some have questioned the capability of delivering the bundle in emergency departments (EDs). The authors report the epidemiology and 6 h bundle compliance of patients with severe sepsis/septic shock presenting to Scottish EDs. METHODS: Analysis of the previously reported Scottish Trauma Audit Group sepsis database was performed including 20 mainland Scottish EDs. A total of 308,910 attendances were screened (between 2 March and 31 May 2009), and 5285 of 27,046 patients were identified after case note review and included on the database. This analysis includes patients who had severe sepsis/septic shock before leaving the ED. Epidemiological, severity of illness criteria, and ED management data were analysed. RESULTS: 626 patients (median age 73; M/F ratio 1:1; 637 presentations) met entrance criteria. The median number of cases per site was 16 (range 3-103). 561 (88.1%) patients arrived by ambulance. The most common source of infection was the respiratory tract (n=411, 64.5%) The most common physiological derangements were heart rate (n=523, 82.1%), respiratory rate (n=452, 71%) and white cell count (n=432, 67.8%). The median hospital stay was 9 days (IQR 4-17 days). 201 (31.6%) patients were admitted to critical care within 2 days, 130 (20.4%) directly from the ED. 180 patients (28.3%) died. There was poor compliance with all aspect of the SSC resuscitation bundle. CONCLUSIONS: Sepsis presentations are of variable frequency but have typical epidemiology and clinical outcomes. SSC bundle resuscitation uptake is poor in Scottish EDs.

The evolution of the role of the Emergency Nurse Practitioner in Scotland: a longitudinal study.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To examine how the role of the Emergency Nurse Practitioner has evolved in Scotland. BACKGROUND: In 2001, Cooper and colleagues published a report on their survey (carried out in 1998) which described the extent and nature of Emergency Nurse Practitioner services in Scotland. They described a nascent nursing role and service that existed in almost half of Emergency Departments and that concentrated its activity on the management of minor distal limb trauma and wound management. Since that date, several relevant and important political, professional and local issues have combined to accelerate the development of this role. DESIGN: Longitudinal survey of Scottish Emergency Departments (n = 97 in 1998, n = 93 in 2009). METHOD: Census survey of all Scottish Emergency Departments identified by NHS National Services Scotland's Information and Statistics Division Accident and Emergency Waiting Times dataset 2006-07. RESULTS: Emergency Nurse Practitioners are now practising in the majority (89%) of Emergency Departments and Minor Injury Units compared with 47% in 1998. Most departments (78%) use Emergency Nurse Practitioners in dual roles, and most departments (67%) differentiate their Emergency Nurse Practitioners from other nursing staff by use of a title. Wide variations in pay, role and scope of practice still exist. CONCLUSIONS: The role of the Emergency Nurse Practitioner has increasingly become part of mainstream health care delivery in Emergency Departments across Scotland and can now be considered to be common place. This study demonstrates that 'Advanced Nursing Practitioners' and 'Nurse Practitioners' cannot necessarily be considered to be synonymous, and nursing roles that are allowed to evolve naturally adopt a non-uniform level of practice. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: This paper is of interest to Nurse Practitioners and workforce planners.