
You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.
You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.
<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>');
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://beta.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=undefined&type=result"></script>');
-->
</script>
Legumes—A Comprehensive Exploration of Global Food-Based Dietary Guidelines and Consumption

Despite the well-known human and planetary health benefits of legumes, consumption is often low. This scoping review aimed to evaluate the inclusion of legumes in global food-based dietary guidelines (FBDG), and to review consumption data against global food group classifications for legumes. The review of FBDG from 94 countries identified legume-based key messaging, the key terms used to define legumes, recommended serving size and frequency of consumption and the classification of legumes into food groups as depicted by food guides. The 2018 Global Dietary Database isolated consumption data of legumes and beans using individual-level, nationally representative dietary survey data for matched countries. Food-based dietary guidelines from 40/94 countries most often identified legumes utilising the term legumes, followed by beans (n = 13), pulses (n = 10), or as beans, peas and lentils (n = 5). The serving size recommendations for legume consumption varied widely, and there was no consistency in the suggested frequency of consumption. Median bean and legume consumption for countries with FBDG ranged from 1.2 g/d (Norway) to 122.7 g/d (Afghanistan). Classification of legumes into food groups varied, with 38% of countries categorising legumes in the protein-rich food group, 20% were in a group on their own and 15% were in the starchy staples group. In countries where legumes were together with either nuts or seeds had the greatest range in intake (11.6–122.7 g/day), followed by those that grouped legumes together with protein-rich foods (4.0–104.7 g/day), while countries that grouped legumes into two food groups, in an attempt to promote consumption, tended to have a lower consumption. Greater emphasis and perhaps repositioning of legumes in dietary guidelines may be required to encourage consumption for health, environmental and economic benefits.
- University of Wollongong Australia
- UNSW Sydney Australia
- University of Wollongong Australia
anzsrc-for: 3210 Nutrition and Dietetics, legumes, Serving Size, 610, 32 Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Review, anzsrc-for: 4206 Public Health, Nutrition Policy, anzsrc-for: 32 Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Vegetables, Humans, TX341-641, consumption, dietary guidelines, Nutrition, anzsrc-for: 42 Health Sciences, Nutrition. Foods and food supply, 42 Health Sciences, Fabaceae, sustainability, Diet, anzsrc-for: 0908 Food Sciences, anzsrc-for: 3202 Clinical sciences, 3210 Nutrition and Dietetics, 4206 Public Health, anzsrc-for: 1111 Nutrition and Dietetics, chronic disease
anzsrc-for: 3210 Nutrition and Dietetics, legumes, Serving Size, 610, 32 Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Review, anzsrc-for: 4206 Public Health, Nutrition Policy, anzsrc-for: 32 Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Vegetables, Humans, TX341-641, consumption, dietary guidelines, Nutrition, anzsrc-for: 42 Health Sciences, Nutrition. Foods and food supply, 42 Health Sciences, Fabaceae, sustainability, Diet, anzsrc-for: 0908 Food Sciences, anzsrc-for: 3202 Clinical sciences, 3210 Nutrition and Dietetics, 4206 Public Health, anzsrc-for: 1111 Nutrition and Dietetics, chronic disease
citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).51 popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.Top 10% influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).Top 10% impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.Top 1%
