The low bound score (LBS) of the scale is the sum of the absolute values of all negatively assigned index scores, reflecting inadequate dietary intake, and ranges from 0 to 60. The high bound score (HBS) of the scale is the sum of all positively assigned index scores, reflecting excessive dietary intake, and ranges from 0 to 38. The dietary quality distance (DQD) is the sum of the absolute values of each index, reflecting dietary imbalance. A score of 0 indicates good dietary intake (Suitable), a score that is below 20% of the total score indicates good dietary intake (More suitable), and a score that is 20–40% of the total score indicates acceptable dietary intake (Low level), a score that is 40–60% of the total score indicates poor dietary intake (Medium level), and a score that is more than 60% of the total score indicates the worst dietary intake (High level), also defined as poor dietary quality [30 (link)]. Data on water and sugar were lacking, so scores for added sugar and drinking water were not accounted for [31 (link)].
Dietary Quality Assessment Using DBI-16
The low bound score (LBS) of the scale is the sum of the absolute values of all negatively assigned index scores, reflecting inadequate dietary intake, and ranges from 0 to 60. The high bound score (HBS) of the scale is the sum of all positively assigned index scores, reflecting excessive dietary intake, and ranges from 0 to 38. The dietary quality distance (DQD) is the sum of the absolute values of each index, reflecting dietary imbalance. A score of 0 indicates good dietary intake (Suitable), a score that is below 20% of the total score indicates good dietary intake (More suitable), and a score that is 20–40% of the total score indicates acceptable dietary intake (Low level), a score that is 40–60% of the total score indicates poor dietary intake (Medium level), and a score that is more than 60% of the total score indicates the worst dietary intake (High level), also defined as poor dietary quality [30 (link)]. Data on water and sugar were lacking, so scores for added sugar and drinking water were not accounted for [31 (link)].
Partial Protocol Preview
This section provides a glimpse into the protocol.
The remaining content is hidden due to licensing restrictions, but the full text is available at the following link:
Access Free Full Text.
Corresponding Organization :
Other organizations : University of Science and Technology of China, Bengbu Medical College
Variable analysis
- Cereals (-12–12)
- Fruits and vegetables (vegetables 6-0, fruits 6-0)
- Dairy and soybeans (dairy 6-0, soybeans 6-0)
- Animal foods (meat 4–4, fish 4-0, eggs 4–4)
- Pure energy foods (cooking oil 0–6, alcohol 0–6)
- Condiments (sugar 0–6, salt 0–6)
- Varied diet (-12–0)
- Water (-12–0)
- Low bound score (LBS)
- High bound score (HBS)
- Dietary quality distance (DQD)
- Water consumption data were lacking, so scores for drinking water were not accounted for.
Annotations
Based on most similar protocols
As authors may omit details in methods from publication, our AI will look for missing critical information across the 5 most similar protocols.
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required
Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!