Nutrition Journal (Apr 2024)

The global diet quality score as an indicator of adequate nutrient intake and dietary quality – a nation-wide representative study

  • Marina M. Norde,
  • Sabri Bromage,
  • Dirce M. L. Marchioni,
  • Ana Carolina Vasques,
  • Megan Deitchler,
  • Joanne Arsenaut,
  • Aline M. de Carvalho,
  • Lício Velloso,
  • Walter Willett,
  • Edward Giovannucci,
  • Bruno Geloneze

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12937-024-00949-x
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 23, no. 1
pp. 1 – 14

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background The Global Diet Quality Score (GDQS) was developed to be a simple, timely and cost-effective tool to track, simultaneously, nutritional deficiency and non-communicable disease risks from diet in diverse settings. The objective was to investigate the performance of GDQS as an indicator of adequate nutrient intake and dietary quality in a national-representative sample of the Brazilian population. Methods Nationally-representative data from 44,744 men and non-pregnant and non-lactating women aging ≥ 10 years, from the Brazilian National Dietary Survey were used. Dietary data were collected through two 24-h recalls (24HR). The GDQS was calculated and compared to a proxy indicator of nutrient adequate intake (the Minimum Dietary Diversity for Women—MDD-W) and to an indicator of high-risk diet for non-communicable diseases (caloric contribution from ultra-processed foods—UPF). To estimate the odds for overall nutrient inadequacy across MDD-W and GDQS quintiles, a multiple logistic regression was applied, and the two metrics’ performances were compared using Wald’s post-test. Results The mean GDQS for Brazilians was 14.5 (0–49 possible range), and only 1% of the population had a low-risk diet (GDQS ≥ 23). The GDQS mean was higher in women, elderly individuals and in higher-income households. An inverse correlation was found between the GDQS and UPF (rho (95% CI) = -0.20(-0.21;-0.19)). The odds for nutrient inadequacy were lower as quintiles of GDQS and MDD-W were higher (p-trend < 0.001), and MDD-W had a slightly better performance than GDQS (p-diff < 0.001). Having a low-risk GDQS (≥ 23) lowered the odds for nutrient inadequacy by 74% (95% CI:63%-81%). Conclusion The GDQS is a good indicator of overall nutrient adequacy, and correlates well with UPF in a nationally representative sample of Brazil. Future studies must investigate the relationship between the GDQS and clinical endpoints, strengthening the recommendation to use this metric to surveillance dietary risks.

Keywords