Cited by 79Consumer Attitudes and Food LabelingNutrition, Health and Food BehaviorObesity, Physical Activity, Diet

Accuracy of Stated Energy Contents of Restaurant Foods

Open access
Urban, Lorien E., McCrory, Megan A., Dallal, Gerard E., Das, Sai Krupa, Saltzman, Edward, Weber, Judith L., Roberts, Susan B.·2011·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: National recommendations for the prevention and treatment of obesity emphasize reducing energy intake. Foods purchased in restaurants provide approximately 35% of the daily energy intake in US individuals but the accuracy of the energy contents listed for these foods is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To examine the accuracy of stated energy contents of foods purchased in restaurants. DESIGN AND SETTING: A validated bomb calorimetry technique was used to measure dietary energy in food from 42 restaurants, comprising 269 total food items and 242 unique foods. The restaurants and foods were randomly selected from quick-serve and sit-down restaurants in Massachusetts, Arkansas, and Indiana between January and June 2010. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The difference between restaurant-stated and laboratory-measured energy contents, which were corrected for standard metabolizable energy conversion factors. RESULTS: The absolute stated energy contents were not significantly different from the absolute measured energy contents overall (difference of 10 kcal/portion; 95% confidence interval [CI], -15 to 34 kcal/portion; P = .52); however, the stated energy contents of individual foods were variable relative to the measured energy contents. Of the 269 food items, 50 (19%) contained measured energy contents of at least 100 kcal/portion more than the stated energy contents. Of the 10% of foods with the highest excess energy in the initial sampling, 13 of 17 were available for a second sampling. In the first analysis, these foods contained average measured energy contents of 289 kcal/portion (95% CI, 186 to 392 kcal/portion) more than the stated energy contents; in the second analysis, these foods contained average measured energy contents of 258 kcal/portion (95% CI, 154 to 361 kcal/portion) more than the stated energy contents (P <.001 for each vs 0 kcal/portion difference). In addition, foods with lower stated energy contents contained higher measured energy contents than stated, while foods with higher stated energy contents contained lower measured energy contents (P <.001). CONCLUSIONS: Stated energy contents of restaurant foods were accurate overall. However, there was substantial inaccuracy for some individual foods, with understated energy contents for those with lower energy contents.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2011.993

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Nutrition information posted on restaurants' websites may be under-reported and likely underestimates the average nutrient values.

    “Our study, as well as others, is limited to the accuracy and validity of nutrition information posted on restaurants’ websites, which may be under-reported [20] and likely underestimates the average nutrient values.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Urban, L. E., McCrory, M. A., Dallal, G. E., Das, S. K., Saltzman, E., Weber, J. L., & Roberts, S. B.
Affiliations
  • Jean Mayer Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging (US)
  • Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
  • Tufts University (US)
  • University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (US)
Corresponding author
Roberts, Susan B.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2011-07-20
Volume
306
Issue
3
Pages
287-93
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W1987847331
Cited by
79
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 4
FWCI
6.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (T32HL069772)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Keywords
restaurant food, food labeling, bomb calorimetry, energy intake, obesity prevention, sit-down restaurants
MeSH terms
Arkansas, Energy Intake, Calorimetry, Diet, Food, Food Analysis, Food Labeling, Humans, Indiana, Legislation, Food, Massachusetts, Obesity, Quality Control, Restaurants, Reproducibility of Results, Disclosure

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review