Abstract
Background Ultra-processed foods (UPF), as proposed by the Nova food classification system, are linked to the development of obesity and several non-communicable chronic diseases and deaths from all causes. The Nova-UPF screener developed in Brazil is a simple and quick tool to assess and monitor the consumption of these food products. The aim of this study was to adapt and validate, against the 24-hour dietary recall, this short food-based screener to assess UPF consumption in the Senegalese context.
Methods The tool adaptation was undertaken using DELPHI methodology with national experts and data from a food market survey. The validation study was conducted in the urban area of Dakar in a sample of 301 adults, using as a reference the dietary share of UPF on the day prior to the survey, expressed as a percentage of total energy intake obtained via 24-hour recall. Association between the Nova-UPF score and the dietary share of UPF was evaluated using linear regression models. The Pabak index was used to assess the agreement in participants’ classification according to quintiles of Nova-UPF score and quintiles of the dietary share of UPF.
Results The results show a direct association (p-value<0.001) between intervals of the Nova- UPF score and the average dietary share of UPF. There was a near perfect agreement in the distribution of individuals according to score’s quintiles and UPF dietary share quintiles (Pabak index = 0.84).
Conclusion The study concluded that the score provided by the Nova-UPF screener adapted to the Senegalese context is a valid estimate of UPF consumption.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work is funded through the Innovative Methods and Metrics for Agriculture and Nutrition Action (IMMANA) programme (Grant No. IMMANA 3.06), led by the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM)
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the National Ethics Committee for Health Research (CNERS) of the Ministry of Health and Social Action (Protocol SEN21/17, approved 14 May 2021)
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
author name updated
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
