The impact of calorific screening thresholds and weight status when validating UK supermarket transaction records in dietary evaluation: FIO-STRIDE
Authors' conclusion
The application of screening thresholds based on estimated individual calories purchased may provide a valuable preprocessing step within the analysis of consumer purchase data, allowing agreement to be achieved for absolute nutrient values. Differences in bias between PLWOw/Obwith and PLWOw/Obwithout show that insights into purchase and consumption patterns can be identified using consumer purchase data.
Study context
- Population
- UK retailer loyalty card holders who completed a 170-item food frequency questionnaire and shared transaction records, height, weight and household composition
- Participants
- 642 participants
- Comparison
- Supermarket transaction purchase data vs self-reported dietary intake (FFQ), across calorific screening thresholds, by weight status
- Outcome
- Agreement and bias between purchase data and self-reported intake (energy, sugar, total fat, saturated fat, protein, sodium) across calorific screening thresholds
Methodological detailsBland-Altman analyses
- Bland-Altman analyses
Performance
As reported in the abstract
- No agreement for any nutrient without screening thresholds
- Agreement with screening threshold ≥1000 Kcal/day (energy, sugar, total fat, saturated fat)
- Agreement with screening threshold ≥1500 Kcal/day (protein, sodium)
Further findings
Consumption exceeding estimated retailer purchases, by weight status
- PLWOw/Obwith consumed greater energy than estimated purchased
- 19%
- PLWOw/Obwith consumed greater sugar than estimated purchased
- 36%
- PLWOw/Obwith consumed greater total fat than estimated purchased
- 22%
- PLWOw/Obwith consumed greater saturated fat than estimated purchased
- 25%
- PLWOw/Obwithout only consumed more sugar
- 19%
Original publication
The impact of calorific screening thresholds and weight status when validating UK supermarket transaction records in dietary evaluation: FIO-STRIDE. Int J Obes (Lond). Published 25 May 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →