English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In order to develop appropriate methods of dietary assessment for nutritional education by the dish based approaches, we compared the two commonly used classification methods: the 8 dish group classification (method A) which was previously reported and the 11dish pattern determined by a cluster analysis (method B). We analyzed 577, 1,065, and 1,235 day meal records (totally 2,877 days) collected from 317 women university students, and 122 and 105 of their fathers and mothers. To systematically convert the food intake data into the dish based database, we firstly adopted method A by a database approach according to the definition and standard weight of food groups by using the software we have developed. The resulting food intake data was classified into 8 dish groups: staple foods, main dishes, side dishes, small side dishes, soups, desserts, drinks, and alcoholic beverages. We also analyzed the same food intake data to determine the pattern of dishes by method B, for which we focused on the protein, fat and carbohydrate contents, and on the amounts of vegetables, fruit and milk in each dish as variables for the statistical model. The results derived from the two methods were quite similar, 82 % of the dishes included in the staple food group by method A also being classified as the V pattern (staple foods) by method B. Similarly, 63 % and 30 % of the dishes in the side dish group by method A were classified as X (small main dish) and IV (main dish) by method B. We conclude that the database approaches to classify the Japanese dishes for dietary assessment and nutrition education showed the universal results which may suggest the external validity of those methods. Jpn. J. Nutr. Diet., 66 (1) 15~23 (2008)

Study on the Two Japanese Classifications of Dish Groups: Comparison of the 8-Dish Group Classification with the Dish Pattern from a Cluster Analysis