Healthy Eating Index-2020: Review and Update Process to Reflect the Dietary Guidelines for Americans,2020-2025.

The purpose of this review is to share the process for reviewing, updating, and developing the most recent version of the Healthy Eating Index-2020 (HEI-2020) for ages 2 and older, following the release of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA), 2020-2025. The overall review process included: 1) gathering information from the updated DGA, experts, and federal stakeholders; 2) considering substantive changes and needs for new development, keeping in mind the HEI's key features and guiding principles, the US Department of Agriculture's Dietary Patterns that serve as the foundation for the HEI, and scoring considerations; and 3) completing evaluation analyses, including the examination of content validity. The review process led to the development of the HEI-2020; a separate HEI-Toddlers-2020 was developed for ages 12 through 23 months. The 13 components and scoring standards of the HEI-2020 fully align with the HEI-2015, although the index was renamed to clarify that it aligned with the most recent 2020-2025 DGA. As the evidence informing the DGA continues to evolve, various aspects of the HEI may need to evolve in the future as well. Further methodological research is encouraged to add to the scientific evidence base on dietary patterns, to examine needs specific to each life stage, and to model optimal trajectories of healthy dietary patterns over the lifespan.

Continuity, Considerations, and Future Directions for the Healthy Eating Index-Toddlers-2020.

The Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025 includes guidance for infants and toddlers aged birth to 24 months. To assess alignment with this new guidance, the Healthy Eating Index (HEI)-Toddlers-2020 was developed for toddlers 12 through 23 months old. This monograph focuses on the continuity, considerations, and future directions of this new index for toddlers in the context of evolving dietary guidance. There is considerable continuity between the HEI-Toddlers-2020 and previous versions of the HEI. The same process, guiding principles, and features (with caveats) are repeated in the new index. However, there are unique considerations for measurement, analysis, and interpretation for the HEI-Toddlers-2020 that this article addresses, while identifying future directions for the HEI-Toddlers-2020. The continued evolution of dietary guidance for infants, toddlers, and young children will provide additional opportunities for index-based metrics: considering inclusion of multidimensional layers in dietary patterns, defining a healthy eating trajectory, bridging healthy eating across different life stages, and communicating the constructs of balance among dietary constituents.

Development of the Healthy Eating Index-Toddlers-2020.

The Healthy Eating Index-Toddlers-2020 (HEI-Toddlers-2020) is a measure for assessing how well a set of foods aligns with new guidance in the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025 (DGA) for toddlers aged 12 through 23 months. This new tool was developed using consistent features and the guiding principles of the HEI. The HEI-Toddlers-2020, like HEI-2020, has 13 components reflecting all constituents of dietary intake, except for human milk or infant formula. These components include the following: Total Fruits, Whole Fruits, Total Vegetables, Greens and Beans, Whole Grains, Dairy, Total Protein Foods, Seafood and Plant Proteins, Fatty Acids, Refined Grains, Sodium, Added Sugars, and Saturated Fats. Healthy dietary patterns for toddlers have unique considerations reflected in the scoring standards for Added Sugars and Saturated Fats. Toddlers have lower energy intake relative to high nutrient needs and added sugars should be avoided. Another distinctive difference is that there is no recommendation to limit saturated fats to <10% of energy intake in this age group; however, saturated fats cannot be unlimited without displacing the energy available to achieve other food group and subgroup goals. Calculations using the HEI-Toddlers-2020, like the HEI-2020, result in a total score and a set of individual component scores that reveal a dietary pattern. The release of a HEI-Toddlers-2020 will enable assessment of diet quality that aligns with the DGA and support additional methodological research to examine needs specific to each life stage and how to model trajectories of healthy dietary patterns.

Evaluation of the Healthy Eating Index-Toddlers-2020.

BACKGROUND: With the addition of new guidance for children from birth to 24 months in the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025 (DGA), a Healthy Eating Index (HEI) was developed for toddlers. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the HEI-Toddlers-2020, 5 analyses relevant to construct and concurrent validity and 2 related to reliability were examined. DESIGN: Twenty-four-hour diet recall data from the cross-sectional National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2011-2018) were used. In addition, exemplary menus were analyzed. PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: The main analytic sample included toddlers aged 12 through 23 months (n = 838), with additional analyses of toddlers aged 12 through 35 months (n = 1,717) from the United States. Included participants had valid diet recalls and available weight-for-age data. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes measures included HEI-Toddlers-2020 total and component scores on menus, population distributions, and correlations. STATISTICAL ANALYSES: HEI total and component scores were calculated using menus from the American Academy of Pediatrics and Healthy Eating Research. Score means and distributions were estimated using a Markov Chain Monte Carlo approach with National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data (2011-2018). Principal component analysis explored dimensions and Pearson correlations examined components, energy, and Cronbach α. In addition, HEI-Toddlers-2020 and HEI-2020 scores were compared for identical intakes at age 24 months. RESULTS: For validity, exemplary menus received high scores with the HEI-Toddlers-2020. The mean ± SE total HEI-Toddlers-2020 score for toddlers aged 12 through 23 months was 62.9 ± 0.78 and ranged from 40.1 to 84.4 (1st to 99th percentile). Correlation between diet quality and diet quantity was low (-0.15); the scree plot revealed multiple factors. In addition, total scores for identical intakes were approximately 1.5 points higher for HEI-Toddlers-2020 compared with HEI-2020 (difference range for component scores, -4.97 to 4.89). For reliability, most of the intercorrelations among components were low to moderate (0 to 0.49), with a few exceptions among related components. Cronbach α was .48. These results indicate that the index is multidimensional, with no single component driving the total score, and no unnecessary components that are highly correlated with another component. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrated evidence supportive of validity and reliability. The HEI-Toddlers-2020 can be used to assess alignment with the DGA for toddlers.

Update of the Healthy Eating Index: HEI-2015.

The Healthy Eating Index (HEI) is a measure for assessing whether a set of foods aligns with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA). An updated HEI is released to correspond to each new edition of the DGA, and this article introduces the latest version, which reflects the 2015-2020 DGA. The HEI-2015 components are the same as in the HEI-2010, except Saturated Fat and Added Sugars replace Empty Calories, with the result being 13 components. The 2015-2020 DGA include explicit recommendations to limit intakes of both Added Sugars and Saturated Fats to <10% of energy. HEI-2015 does not account for excessive energy from alcohol within a separate component, but continues to account for all energy from alcohol within total energy (the denominator for most components). All other components remain the same as for HEI-2010, except for a change in the allocation of legumes. Previous versions of the HEI accounted for legumes in either the two vegetable or the two protein foods components, whereas HEI-2015 counts legumes toward all four components. Weighting approaches are similar to those of previous versions, and scoring standards were maintained, refined, or developed to increase consistency across components; better ensure face validity; follow precedent; cover a range of intakes; and, when applicable, ensure the DGA level corresponds to a score >7 out of 10. HEI-2015 component scores can be examined collectively using radar graphs to reveal a pattern of diet quality and summed to represent overall diet quality.

Applications of the Healthy Eating Index for Surveillance, Epidemiology, and Intervention Research: Considerations and Caveats.

The Healthy Eating Index (HEI) is a measure of diet quality that can be used to examine alignment of dietary patterns with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. The HEI is made up of multiple adequacy and moderation components, most of which are expressed relative to energy intake (ie, as densities) for the purpose of calculating scores. Due to these characteristics and the complexity of dietary intake data more broadly, calculating and using HEI scores can involve unique statistical considerations and, depending on the particular application, intensive computational methods. The objective of this article is to review potential applications of the HEI, including those relevant to surveillance, epidemiology, and intervention research, and to summarize available guidance for appropriate analysis and interpretation. Steps in calculating HEI scores are reviewed and statistical methods described. Consideration of salient issues in the calculation and interpretation of scores can help researchers avoid common pitfalls and reviewers ensure that articles reporting on the use of the HEI include sufficient details such that the work is comprehensible and replicable, with the overall goal of contributing to knowledge on dietary patterns and health among Americans.

Evaluation of the Healthy Eating Index-2015.

BACKGROUND: The Healthy Eating Index (HEI), a diet quality index that measures alignment with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, was updated with the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. OBJECTIVE AND DESIGN: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the HEI-2015, eight questions were examined: five relevant to construct validity, two related to reliability, and one to assess criterion validity. DATA SOURCES: Three data sources were used: exemplary menus (n=4), National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2011-2012 (N=7,935), and the National Institutes of Health-AARP (formally known as the American Association of Retired Persons) Diet and Health Study (N=422,928). STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Exemplary menus: Scores were calculated using the population ratio method. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2011-2012: Means and standard errors were estimated using the Markov Chain Monte Carlo approach. Analyses were stratified to compare groups (with t tests and analysis of variance). Principal components analysis examined the number of dimensions. Pearson correlations were estimated between components, energy, and Cronbach's coefficient alpha. National Institutes of Health-AARP Diet and Health Study: Adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine scores and mortality outcomes. RESULTS: For construct validity, the HEI-2015 yielded high scores for exemplary menus as four menus received high scores (87.8 to 100). The mean score for National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey was 56.6, and the first to 99th percentile were 32.6 to 81.2, respectively, supporting sufficient variation. Among smokers, the mean score was significantly lower than among nonsmokers (53.3 and 59.7, respectively) (P<0.01), demonstrating differentiation between groups. The correlation between diet quality and diet quantity was low (all <0.25) supporting these elements being independent. The components demonstrated multidimensionality when examined with a scree plot (at least four dimensions). For reliability, most of the intercorrelations among the components were low to moderate (0.01 to 0.49) with a few exceptions, and the standardized Cronbach's alpha was .67. For criterion validity, the highest vs the lowest quintile of HEI-2015 scores were associated with a 13% to 23% decreased risk of all-cause, cancer, and cardiovascular disease mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrated evidence supportive of construct validity, reliability, and criterion validity. The HEI-2015 can be used to examine diet quality relative to the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans.

Comparing Reported Dietary Supplement Intakes between Two 24-Hour Recall Methods: The Automated Self-Administered 24-Hour Dietary Assessment Tool and the Interview-Administered Automated Multiple Pass Method.

BACKGROUND: The Automated Self-Administered 24-hour Dietary Assessment Tool (ASA24) includes a highly standardized multipass web-based recall that, like the Automated Multiple Pass Method (AMPM), captures detailed information about dietary intake using multiple probes and reminders to enhance recall of intakes. The primary distinction between ASA24 and AMPM is that the ASA24 user interface guides participants, thus removing the need for interviewers. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare dietary supplement use reported on self-administered (ASA24-2011) vs interviewer-administered (AMPM) 24-hour recalls. DESIGN: The Food Reporting Comparison Study was an evaluation study designed to compare self-reported intakes captured using the self-administered ASA24 vs data collected via interviewer-administered AMPM recalls. Between 2010 and 2011, 1081 women and men were enrolled from three integrated health care systems that belong to the National Cancer Institute-funded Cancer Research Network: Security Health Plan Marshfield Clinic, Wisconsin; Henry Ford Health System, Michigan; and Kaiser Permanente Northern California, California. Quota sampling was used to ensure a balance of age, sex, and race/ethnicity. Participants were randomly assigned to four groups, and each group was asked to complete two dietary recalls: group 1, two ASA24s; group 2, two AMPMs; group 3, ASA24 first and AMPM second; and group 4, AMPM first and ASA24 second. Dietary supplements were coded using the 2007-2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey Dietary Supplement Database. Analyses used the two one-sided tests, known as TOST, to assess equivalence of reported supplement use between methods. RESULTS: Complete 24-hour dietary recalls that included both dietary and supplement intake data were available for 1076 participants (507 men and 569 women). The proportions reporting supplement use via ASA24 and AMPM were 46% and 43%, respectively. These proportions were equivalent, with a small effect size of less than 20%. There were two exceptions in subgroup analyses: reported use among those 40 to 59 years of age and reported use by non-Hispanic black subjects were higher for ASA24 than AMPM. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that there is little difference in reported supplement use by mode of administration (ie, interview-administered vs self-administered recall).