Cited by 156Nutrition, Health and Food BehaviorNutritional Studies and DietObesity, Physical Activity, Diet

Snacking patterns influence energy and nutrient intakes but not body mass index

Hampl, J. S., Heaton, C. L. B., Taylor, C. A.·2003·Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics

Abstract

Objective To study dietary intake and body mass index (BMI) patterns among US adults, stratified by snacking patterns. Design The 1994–1996 Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII) provided the study sample. Snacking episodes were defined as a ‘food and/or beverage break’, and subjects were classified as morning, afternoon, evening, multiple or never snackers. Subjects/setting Our study included data from 1756 men and 1511 women who provided two nonconsecutive, multiple‐pass 24‐h dietary recalls. Statistical analyses Mean values of each subject's two 24‐h recalls were used for analyses, and data were analysed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) for Windows and SUDAAN. Results Compared with women, men were more likely to be evening, multiple or never snackers. Male multiple snackers had significantly higher energy intakes than did afternoon and never snackers, whereas female multiple snackers had higher energy intakes than did morning, evening and never snackers. At the same time, male and female multiple snackers had more prudent energy‐adjusted intakes of protein, cholesterol, calcium and sodium. Coffee, cola, milk, ice cream and fruits were among the most frequently consumed snacks by men and women. The BMI did not differ significantly across snacker categories. Conclusions These data indicate that snacking patterns have some effects on energy and nutrient intakes but not on BMI. Snack food choices remain a concern, especially beverages, including those that are sweetened. Vegetables and fruits as snacks should be encouraged.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-277x.2003.00417.x

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hampl, J. S., Heaton, C. L. B., & Taylor, C. A.
Affiliations
  • Arizona State University (US)
  • Arizona Department of Health Services (US)
  • Oklahoma State University (US)
Corresponding author
Hampl, J. S.
Venue
Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2003-02
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
3-11
ISSN
  • 0952-3871 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-277X
OpenAlex
W2015950382
Cited by
156
References
43
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 10
FWCI
3.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Keywords
snacking patterns, body mass index, energy intake, nutrient intake, snack food choice, beverage consumption, sweetened beverages, sex differences, dietary intake
MeSH terms
Adult, Calcium, Dietary, Energy Intake, Edible Grain, Cholesterol, Dietary, Diet, Diet Surveys, Dietary Fiber, Dietary Proteins, Feeding Behavior, Female, Humans, Male, Nutritional Physiological Phenomena, Mental Recall, Sex Characteristics, Sodium, Dietary, Time Factors, Diet Records, Body Mass Index

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