Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 1, 2026

High-throughput, Microscale Protocol for the Analysis of Processing Parameters and Nutritional Qualities in Maize Zea mays L.
Published on: June 16, 2018
Comparison of food processing classification frameworks in the NHANES 2017-2018
Shutong Du1, Jiaqi Yang1, Valerie K Sullivan1
1Welch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology, and Clinical Research, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States; Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, United States.
Comparing food processing classification systems reveals consistent links between highly processed foods and poorer health outcomes, highlighting the need for a standardized approach. These findings are crucial for nutrition science, public health policy, and understanding cardiometabolic health.
Area of Science:
- Nutrition Science
- Public Health
- Food Policy
Background:
- Food processing's link to adverse health outcomes is a key focus in nutrition science.
- Evaluating diverse food processing classification systems offers insights into definitions and implications for research, health, and policy.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the NOVA, International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), International Food Information Council (IFIC), and University of North Carolina (UNC) food processing classification systems.
- To assess their characteristics, reliability, and associations with nutrient intake and cardiometabolic risk factors.
Main Methods:
- Utilized data from 4,392 adult participants in the 2017-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES).
- Categorized 4,605 food and beverage items using four classification systems, harmonizing processing levels into minimally processed, processed, and highly processed/formulated foods.
- Analyzed sociodemographic characteristics, nutrient profiles, and cardiometabolic risk factors using weighted linear regression models.
Main Results:
- Inter-rater reliability ranged from 68% to 86%. Significant variations in classification proportions were observed across systems (e.g., IARC vs. IFIC for highly processed foods).
- Top contributors to highly processed/formulated food intake included grain products, meat/poultry/fish mixtures, and sugars/sweets/beverages.
- Higher intake of highly processed/formulated foods consistently correlated with younger age, specific racial/ethnic groups, lower education, reduced nutrient intake (protein, fiber, micronutrients), increased BMI, and elevated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels.
Conclusions:
- Despite differing classification criteria, consistent associations were found across systems regarding nutrient intake, sociodemographic factors, and cardiometabolic parameters.
- A standardized food classification system is essential for a unified understanding of ultra-processed foods and their health impacts.
Related Concept Videos
Surveys
The Roles of Bacteria and Fungi in Plant Nutrition
Introduction to Surveying, Plane Surveying and Geodetic Surveys
National Nursing Organizations I
National Nursing Organizations II
The AACN emphasizes a healthy work environment through six standards to achieve an optimal patient outcome. The standards are appropriate staffing, meaningful recognition, collaboration, authentic leadership, effective communication, and decision-making. In addition, AACN provides certification programs, webinars, journals, and...
Errors and Mistakes in Surveying

