Cited by 65Consumer Attitudes and Food LabelingNutrition, Health and Food BehaviorFood and Agricultural Sciences

The Accuracy of Stated Energy Contents of Reduced-Energy, Commercially Prepared Foods

Open access
Urban, Lorien E., Dallal, Gerard E., Robinson, Lisa M., Ausman, Lynne M., Saltzman, Edward, Roberts, Susan B.·2010·Journal of the American Dietetic Association

Abstract

The accuracy of stated energy contents of reduced-energy restaurant foods and frozen meals purchased from supermarkets was evaluated. Measured energy values of 29 quick-serve and sit-down restaurant foods averaged 18% more than stated values, and measured energy values of 10 frozen meals purchased from supermarkets averaged 8% more than originally stated. These differences substantially exceeded laboratory measurement error but did not achieve statistical significance due to considerable variability in the degree of underreporting. Some individual restaurant items contained up to 200% of stated values and, in addition, free side dishes increased provided energy to an average of 245% of stated values for the entrees they accompanied. These findings suggest that stated energy contents of reduced-energy meals obtained from restaurants and supermarkets are not consistently accurate, and in this study averaged more than measured values, especially when free side dishes were taken into account. If widespread, this phenomenon could hamper efforts to self-monitor energy intake to control weight, and could also reduce the potential benefit of recent policy initiatives to disseminate information on food energy content at the point of purchase.

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 · 10.1016/j.jada.2009.10.003

Cites

24 of 24 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?

  • In FSRs, energy content was understated for higher-energy items and overstated for lower-energy items.

    “It has been shown that, in FSRs, energy content was understated for higher-energy items and overstated for lower-energy items [42].”

    From Healthier side dishes at restaurants: an analysis of children's perspectives, menu content, and energy impacts (2014) · cites this paper as [42]

    The Results and Discussion (page not provided) report that restaurant foods averaged 18% more energy than stated, supporting understatements of energy content. The paper does not establish that understatements occurred specifically for higher-energy items or that lower-energy items were overstated. (LLM, conf=0.79)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Previous research has demonstrated that energy content information from restaurants is accurate on average, but there are discrepancies between stated and actual energy content on some types of menu items.

    “previous research has demonstrated that energy content information from restaurants is accurate on average, but that there are discrepancies between stated and actual energy content on some types of menu items.”

    From Healthier side dishes at restaurants: an analysis of children's perspectives, menu content, and energy impacts (2014) · cites this paper as [42]

    The Results and Discussion report no statistically significant average difference between stated and measured energy for restaurant foods, but measured values averaged 18% higher, so “accurate on average” needs qualification. The paper also reports substantial discrepancies for individual items, but found no significant association between discrepancies and the menu-item types it examined. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [20]Woo S Push for calories on menus gains The Wall Street Journal 2008 June 11 A2
  2. [33]Food Additives Permitted for Direct Addition to Food for Human Consumption 2005 21 CFR §172 27101640

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Urban, L. E., Dallal, G. E., Robinson, L. M., Ausman, L. M., Saltzman, E., & Roberts, S. B.
Affiliations
Tufts University (US)
Corresponding author
Roberts, Susan B.
Venue
Journal of the American Dietetic Association
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-01
Volume
110
Issue
1
Pages
116-123
ISSN
0002-8223 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2129756411
Cited by
65
References
24
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 6
FWCI
3.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Dietetic Association (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (HL069772-06)
  • US Department of Agriculture (58-1950-4-401)
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
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food and Agricultural Sciences
Keywords
restaurant food, frozen meals, food labeling, side dishes, weight management
MeSH terms
Energy Intake, Calorimetry, Commerce, Dietary Carbohydrates, Dietary Fats, Dietary Fiber, Dietary Proteins, Food Analysis, Food Labeling, Frozen Foods, Humans, Nutritive Value, Obesity, Restaurants

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