Menu Evaluation Tools in Food Services: An Integrative Review

Clicks: 11
ID: 337749
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #47 of 50 articles by views in nutrition reviews

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Context The growing demand for meals outside the home has boosted the food service sector, but there are constant concerns regarding the nutritional quality of the meals offered. In this scenario, menus play a strategic role in promoting health and in defining population dietary patterns. Objective This integrative review aimed to identify the instruments used to evaluate menus in food service settings across different contexts and target audiences. Data Sources This is an integrative review with a systematic search in the LILACS, Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science databases, with controlled and uncontrolled descriptors. Original studies published between 2003 and 2025 that described the development of menu evaluation instruments aimed at healthy food service were included. Data Extraction Data were extracted on the characteristics of the instruments, including target population, food service setting, scope, evaluation approach, assessment perspectives, number of items, country of development, and validation status. Data Analysis Data were summarized using descriptive statistics, including absolute and relative frequencies. A total of 29 studies were included, with a predominance of instruments aimed at children’s menus (55.2%) and with a qualitative approach (72.4%). Brazil had the largest number of developed instruments, followed by Spain, the United States, and Portugal. Only 58.6% of the instruments presented some type of validation. The instruments varied in scope (menu or menu + context), evaluation method (qualitative, quantitative, or qualitative-quantitative), and the number of perspectives covered, with 10.3% multidimensional (ie, having 4 or more dimensions). Conclusion The review showed advances in evaluating menus for the child population and in incorporating sustainability as an analytical parameter. However, gaps remain in validation and the development of multidimensional instruments, underscoring the need for validated and adapted tools to promote healthier, more sustainable menus.
Reference Key
openalex_W7224658367 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Lívia Bacharini Lima, Emanuele Batistela dos Santos, Raquel Braz Assunção Botelho, Rita de Cássia Coelho de Almeida Akutsu
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal nutrition reviews
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/nutrit/nuag158
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuag158
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.