Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 299

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 149 of the 149 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Systematic Review of the Measurement of Sustainable Diets

Open access
Jones, Andrew D, Hoey, Lesli, Blesh, Jennifer, Miller, Laura, Green, Ashley, Shapiro, Lilly Fink·2016·Advances in Nutrition

Abstract

Sustainability has become an integral consideration of the dietary guidelines of many countries in recent decades. However, a lack of clear metrics and a shared approach to measuring the multiple components of sustainable diets has hindered progress toward generating the evidence needed to ensure the credibility of new guidelines. We performed a systematic literature review of empirical research studies on sustainable diets to identify the components of sustainability that were measured and the methods applied to do so. Two independent reviewers systematically searched 30 databases and other sources with the use of a uniform set of search terms and a priori exclusion criteria. In total, 113 empirical studies were included in the final review. Nearly all of the studies were focused on high-income countries. Although there was substantial heterogeneity in the components of sustainability measured, the estimated greenhouse gas emissions (GHGEs) of various dietary patterns were by far most commonly measured (n = 71 studies). Estimating the GHGEs of foods through various stages of production, use, and recycling with the use of the Life Cycle Assessment approach was the most common method applied to measure the environmental impacts of diets (n = 49 studies). Many components of sustainable diets identified in existing conceptual frameworks are disproportionately underrepresented in the empirical literature, as are studies that examine consumer demand for sustainable dietary alternatives. The emphasis in the literature on high-income countries also overlooks the production and dietary alternatives most relevant to low- and middle-income countries. We propose 3 methodological and measurement approaches that would both improve the global relevance of our understanding of sustainable diets and attend more completely to the existing multidimensional, multiscale conceptual framing of sustainable diets.

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 · 10.3945/an.115.011015

Cites

149 of 149 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

Show all 149 references

Cited by

See all 299

Metadata

Authors
Jones, A. D., Hoey, L., Blesh, J., Miller, L., Green, A., & Shapiro, L. F.
Venue
Advances in Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-07
Volume
7
Issue
4
Pages
641-664
ISSN
  • 2156-5376 (ISSN-L)
  • 2161-8313
OpenAlex
W2465008865
Cited by
299
References
149
FWCI
2.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Systematic Review of the Measurement of Sustainable Diets. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3945/an.115.011015
The paper
Jones, A. D., Hoey, L., Blesh, J., Miller, L., Green, A., & Shapiro, L. F. (2016). A Systematic Review of the Measurement of Sustainable Diets. Advances in Nutrition. https://doi.org/10.3945/an.115.011015

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.