A methodological framework for deriving the German food-based dietary guidelines 2024: Food groups, nutrient goals, and objective functions

Anne Carolin Schäfer, Heiner Boeing, Rozenn Gazan, Johanna Conrad, Kurt Gedrich, Christina Breidenassel, Hans Hauner, Anja Kroke, Jakob Linseisen, Stefan Lorkowski, Ute Nöthlings, Margrit Richter, Lukas Schwingshackl, Florent Vieux and Bernhard Watzl

PLOS ONE, 2025, vol. 20, issue 3, 1-21

Abstract: Background: For a growing number of food-based dietary guidelines (FBDGs), diet optimization is the tool of choice to account for the complex demands of healthy and sustainable diets. However, decisions about such optimization models’ parameters are rarely reported nor systematically studied. Objectives: The objectives were to develop a framework for (i) the formulation of decision variables based on a hierarchical food classification system; (ii) the mathematical form of the objective function; and (iii) approaches to incorporate nutrient goals. Methods: To answer objective (i), food groups from FoodEx2 levels 3-7 were applied as decision variables in a model using acceptability constraints (5th and 95th percentile for food intakes of German adults (n = 10,419)) and minimizing the deviation from the average observed dietary intakes. Building upon, to answer objectives (ii) and (iii), twelve models were run using decision variables from FoodEx2 level 3 (n = 255), applying either a linear or squared and a relative or absolute way to deviate from observed dietary intakes, and three different lists of nutrient goals (allNUT-DRV, incorporating all nutrient goals; modNUT-DRV excluding nutrients with limited data quality; modNUT-AR using average requirements where applicable instead of recommended intakes). Results: FoodEx2 food groups proved suitable as diet optimization decision variables. Regarding deviation, the largest differences were between the four different objective function types, e.g., in the linear-relative modNUT-DRV model, 46 food groups of the observed diet were changed to reach the model’s goal, in linear-absolute 78 food groups, squared-relative 167, and squared-absolute 248. The nutrient goals were fulfilled in all models, but the number of binding nutrient constraints was highest in the linear-relative models (e.g. allNUT-DRV: 11 vs. 7 in linear-absolute). Conclusion: Considering the various possibilities to operationalize dietary aspects in an optimization model, this study offers valuable contributions to a framework for developing FBDGs via diet optimization.

Date: 2025
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0313347 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 13347&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0313347

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0313347

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().