CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 173

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Best practices for applying the Nova food classification system

Martinez-Steele, Euridice, Khandpur, Neha, Batis, Carolina, Bes-Rastrollo, Maira, Bonaccio, Marialaura, Cediel, Gustavo, Huybrechts, Inge, Juul, Filippa, Levy, Renata B., da Costa Louzada, Maria Laura, Machado, Priscila P., Moubarac, Jean-Claude, Nansel, Tonja, Rauber, Fernanda, Srour, Bernard, Touvier, Mathilde, Monteiro, Carlos A.·2023·Nature Food
DOI 10.1038/s43016-023-00779-w
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s43016-023-00779-w

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Studies using best practices have found food frequency questionnaires to be acceptably valid and reliable in classifying foods using Nova.

    “Studies using best practices 203 have found food frequency questionnaires to be acceptably valid and reliable in classifying foods using Nova.[204][205][206][207]”

    From Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence (2025) · cites this paper as [203]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 22

  1. Monteiro, C. A. et al. Public Health Nutr. 21, 5–17 (2018). · DOI · Paper page
  2. Dinu, M. et al. Int. J. Food Sci. Nutr. 72, 861–869 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  3. Sarbagili-Shabat, C. et al. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 74, 1653–1660 (2020). · DOI
  4. Neri, D et al. Preprint at medRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.04.28.23289211 (2023). · DOI
  5. Khandpur, N. et al. J. Nutr. Sci. 10, E77 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  6. Louzada, M. L. C. et al. Rev. Saude Publica 57, 12 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  7. Martinez Steele, E. et al. Nutr. Metab. Cardiovasc. Dis. 32, 2739–2750 (2022). · DOI · Paper page
  8. Chang, K. et al. JAMA Pediatr. 175, e211573 (2021). · DOI
  9. Srour, B. et al. BMJ 365, l1451 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  10. Mendonça, R. D. et al. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 104, 1433–1440 (2016). · DOI · Paper page
  11. Bonaccio, M. et al. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 113, 446–455 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  12. Rauber, F. et al. Eur. J. Nutr. 60, 2169–2180 (2021). · DOI
  13. Cummings, J. R., Lipsky, L. M., Schwedhelm, C., Liu, A. & Nansel, T. R. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 19, 61 (2022). · DOI
  14. Kliemann, N. et al. Lancet Planet. Health 7, e219–e232 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  15. Martínez Steele, E. et al. J. Nutr. 153, 225–241 (2023). · DOI
  16. Wang, L. et al. BMJ 378, e068921 (2022). · DOI
  17. Fangupo, L. J. et al. Nutrients 11, 1290 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  18. Oviedo-Solís, C. I. et al. Front. Nutr. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2022.737432 (2022). · DOI · Paper page
  19. Oviedo-Solís, C. I., Monterrubio-Flores, E. A., Cediel, G., Denova-Gutiérrez, E. & Barquera, S. J. Acad. Nutr. Diet. 122, 1129–1140 (2022). · DOI · Paper page
  20. Jung, S., Park, S. & Kim, J. Y. Public Health Nutr. 25, 1166–1175 (2022). · DOI
  21. Huybrechts, I. et al. Front. Nutr. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2022.1035580 (2022). · DOI · Paper page
  22. Sneed, N. M. et al. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 117, 182–190 (2023). · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Martinez-Steele, E., Khandpur, N., Batis, C., Bes-Rastrollo, M., Bonaccio, M., Cediel, G., Huybrechts, I., Juul, F., Levy, R. B., da Costa Louzada, M. L., Machado, P. P., Moubarac, J.-C., Nansel, T., Rauber, F., Srour, B., Touvier, M., & Monteiro, C. A.
ORCID
Venue
Nature Food
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2023-06-01
Volume
4
Issue
6
Pages
445-448
ISSN
2662-1355
DOI
10.1038/s43016-023-00779-w
Cited by
173
References
2
Language
en
Licence

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