Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
Type: Journal article
Title: Comparing the nutritional impact of dietary strategies to reduce discretionary choice intake in the Australian adult population: a simulation modelling study
Author: Grieger, J.
Johnson, B.
Wycherley, T.
Golley, R.
Citation: Nutrients, 2017; 9(5):442-1-442-15
Publisher: MDPI AG
Issue Date: 2017
ISSN: 2072-6643
Statement of
Jessica A. Grieger, Brittany J. Johnson, Thomas P. Wycherley and Rebecca K. Golley
Abstract: Dietary strategies to reduce discretionary choice intake are commonly utilized in practice, but evidence on their relative efficacy is lacking. The aim was to compare the potential impact on nutritional intake of three strategies to reducing discretionary choices intake in the Australian adult (19–90 years) population. Dietary simulation modelling using data from the National Nutrition and Physical Activity Survey 2011–2012 was conducted (n = 9341; one 24 h dietary recall). Strategies modelled were: moderation (reduce discretionary choices by 50%, with 0%, 25% or 75% energy compensation); substitution (replace 50% of discretionary choices with core choices); reformulation (replace 50% SFA with unsaturated fats, reduce added sugars by 25%, and reduce sodium by 20%). Compared to the base case (observed) intake, modelled intakes in the moderation scenario showed: −17.3% lower energy (sensitivity analyses, 25% energy compensation −14.2%; 75% energy compensation −8.0%), −20.9% lower SFA (−17.4%; −10.5%), −43.3% lower added sugars (−41.1%; −36.7%) and 17.7% lower sodium (−14.3%; −7.5%). Substitution with a range of core items, or with fruits, vegetables and core beverages only, resulted in similar changes in energy intake (−13.5% and −15.4%), SFA (−17.7% and −20.1%), added sugars (−42.6% and −43%) and sodium (−13.7% and −16.5%), respectively. Reformulating discretionary choices had minimal impact on reducing energy intake but reduced SFA (−10.3% to −30.9%), added sugars (−9.3% to −52.9%), and alcohol (−25.0% to −49.9%) and sodium (−3.3% to −13.2%). The substitution and reformulation scenarios minimized negative changes in fiber, protein and micronutrient intakes. While each strategy has strengths and limitations, substitution of discretionary choices with core foods and beverages may optimize the nutritional impact.
Keywords: Nutrition epidemiology; public health; computer modelling; dietary simulation; discretionary choices; dietary modification; dietary strategies; obesity prevention; chronic disease prevention; adults
Description: Published: 3 May 2017. Corrected by: Erratum: Grieger, J.A.; et al.: Comparing the Nutritional Impact of Dietary Strategies to Reduce Discretionary Choice Intake in the Australian Adult Population: A Simulation Modelling Study. Nutrients 2017, 9, 442, in Vol. 9, Issue 8, 851. There was anerror in the median intake ratio calculation used in the substitution strategies. The median intake ratios have been corrected throughout Supplementary Table S1. The corrected calculations have led to minor changes (i.e., less than 5% change in nutrient intakes) to results reported in the abstract (page 1), the substitution results text (page 8 and 9), tables and figures (Table 2, columns 4 and 5, page 8; Figure 1, light green and dark green bars, page 6; Figure 2, green bars page 7; Supplementary Table S1, substitution replacement rows; Supplementary Table S3, columns 4–8; and Supplementary Table S6, columns 2 and 3). The corrected tables and text are shown below. These changes have no material impact on the conclusions of our paper. We apologize for any inconvenience caused. The manuscript will be updated and the original will remain online on the article website.
Rights: © 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (
DOI: 10.3390/nu9050442
Grant ID:
Appears in Collections:Aurora harvest 3
Molecular and Biomedical Science publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
hdl_111964.pdfPublished version638 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.