Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 498

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Trends in Dietary Quality Among Adults in the United States, 1999 Through 2010

Open access
Wang, Dong D., Leung, Cindy W., Li, Yanping, Ding, Eric L., Chiuve, Stephanie E., Hu, Frank B., Willett, Walter C.·2014·JAMA Internal Medicine
DOI 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.3422
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Many changes in the economy, policies related to nutrition, and food processing have occurred within the United States since 2000, and the net effect on dietary quality is not clear. These changes may have affected various socioeconomic groups differentially. OBJECTIVE: To investigate trends in dietary quality from 1999 to 2010 in the US adult population and within socioeconomic subgroups. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Nationally representative sample of 29 124 adults aged 20 to 85 years from the US 1999 to 2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The Alternate Healthy Eating Index 2010 (AHEI-2010), an 11-dimension score (range, 0-10 for each component score and 0-110 for the total score), was used to measure dietary quality. A higher AHEI-2010 score indicated a more healthful diet. RESULTS: The energy-adjusted mean of the AHEI-2010 increased from 39.9 in 1999 to 2000 to 46.8 in 2009 to 2010 (linear trend P < .001). Reduction in trans fat intake accounted for more than half of this improvement. The AHEI-2010 component score increased by 0.9 points for sugar-sweetened beverages and fruit juice (reflecting decreased consumption), 0.7 points for whole fruit, 0.5 points for whole grains, 0.5 points for polyunsaturated fatty acids, and 0.4 points for nuts and legumes over the 12-year period (all linear trend P < .001). Family income and education level were positively associated with total AHEI-2010, and the gap between low and high socioeconomic status widened over time, from 3.9 points in 1999 to 2000 to 7.8 points in 2009 to 2010 (interaction P = .01). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Although a steady improvement in AHEI-2010 was observed across the 12-year period, the overall dietary quality remains poor. Better dietary quality was associated with higher socioeconomic status, and the gap widened with time. Future efforts to improve nutrition should address these disparities.

Overview

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/jamainternmed.2014.3422

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 498

Metadata

Authors
Wang, D. D., Leung, C. W., Li, Y., Ding, E. L., Chiuve, S. E., Hu, F. B., & Willett, W. C.
Venue
JAMA Internal Medicine
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
2014-10-01
Volume
174
Issue
10
Pages
1587
ISSN
2168-6106 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.3422
OpenAlex
W1984981590
Cited by
498
References
12
FWCI
30.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.