Need attention
- Core nutrient evidence is incomplete, so the nutrition score is unavailable.
What would improve the assessment
- Part of this signal relies on inferred values, so direct declared data would improve reliability.



Nutrition snapshot
The nutrient profile is mixed or moderate based on the available evidence.
Nutrition score
58
/100
Nutrition interpretation
Moderate signal
The nutrient profile is mixed or moderate based on the available evidence.
Help improve this record
Structured source data
Ingredient-level explanation
Pomme de terre cuite 37,2% , purée de pomme de terre 18,1 %, crème fraîche liquide (_lait_), pomme de terre vitelotte 6,9 % (pomme de terre vitelotte, sel), patate douce 6,9 %, beurre (_lait_), purée d'asperge verte 5,1 %, échalote, cranberrie séchée 1,2% (sucre, cranberrie, farine de riz, huile de tournesol), pistache 1,2 %, oignon, abricot séché 0,9% [abricot, farine de riz, antioxydant: _anhydride sulfureux_ (_sulfites_)], _noisette_ hachée grillée 0,9 %, sel, Grana Padano 0,3% (_lait_, sel, présure, conservateur: lyzozyme d'_œuf_), épaississant : méthylcellulose, poivre.
Food score panel
Each dimension stays separate so the product can score well in one area and weakly in another without hiding trade-offs.
Nutrition score
58
/100
Nutrition profile
label quality is the strongest signal right now, while processing needs the most caution.
Strongest area
Label quality
Weakest area
Processing
Data confidence
high
Data confidence
Data confidence 90/100
High reliability
The data is strong and the assessment carries high confidence.
Confidence layer
Category breakdown
The result is uneven: strengths and weaknesses are balanced.
Nutrition profile
Mixed
58/100
58
Nutrition score is available, but some inputs were inferred.
Processing
Very highly processed
Very highly processed
12
Processing indicator kept separate from the nutrition score.
Environmental signal
Mixed
51/100
51
Estimated environmental signal with limited precision.
Label quality
Strong
88/100
88
Label quality reflects completeness and consistency of the record, not nutrition quality.
How is the score built?
Open the methodology note
Nutrition score measures nutrient profile only. Processing, environment, label quality, and data confidence stay separate so missing data or formulation signals do not silently change nutrition quality.
The data is broad and consistent. The interpretation is likely to remain stable.
Score drivers
Supports the assessment
Mandatory field coverage is strong (88%).
Impact: medium
Pulls the score down
Declared NOVA group 4 anchors the processing indicator.
Impact: high
A long ingredient list (55 ingredients) supports a more processed classification.
Impact: low
Uncertain area
Core nutrient evidence is incomplete, so the nutrition score is unavailable.
Impact: high
Confidence is reduced by missing nutrition evidence.
Impact: high
The record is missing a nutrition panel.
Impact: high
Related products

Food. Evidence quality: medium
nutrition score
Score summary
36
Nutrition score
label quality is the strongest signal right now, while nutrition profile needs the most caution.
Data confidence
75/100
medium reliability
medium confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

Food. Ingredients: Préparation pour sablé 250 g Farine de BLE, sucre, arôme, poudre à lever E450, E500, , sel, colorant beta-carotène Tube de glaçage blanc 20 g Sucre, Sirop de glucose, eau, huile de colza, emulsifiants E475, E471, amidon de riz, arome, colorant El 71 , maltodextrine, gelifiant E440, conservateur E202, régulateur d'acidité E330 Tube de glaçage rouge 20g Sucre, Sirop de glu ose, huile de colza, eau, colorants (beterave, extrait de paprika), amidon de riz, arôme, maltodextrine, emulsifiant (E475, E471), gelifiant (E440), conservateur ( E202) regulateur d'acité (E330) Petits yeux en sucre 25 g Sucre, épaississant E414, albumine de LAIT solubilisé, acidifiant E330 , humectant E422, émulsifiant lécithine de SOJA, colorant El 32, E171,E172. Allergènes : Peut contenir des traces d'oeufs, de fruits à coques , d'arachides, de mais. Evidence quality: high
nutrition score
Score summary
33
Nutrition score
label quality is the strongest signal right now, while processing needs the most caution.
Data confidence
87/100
high reliability

Food. Evidence quality: medium
nutrition score
Score summary
36
Nutrition score
label quality is the strongest signal right now, while nutrition profile needs the most caution.
Data confidence
63/100
medium reliability

Food. Evidence quality: medium
nutrition score
Score summary
18
Nutrition score
label quality is the strongest signal right now, while nutrition profile needs the most caution.
Data confidence
72/100
medium reliability
NOVA 4 viitab ulatuslikule tööstuslikule töötlemisele ja suuremale formulatsiooni keerukusele.
Kohe
Võib soodustada ülesöömist, sest maitse- ja tekstuuriprofiil on sageli väga stimuleeriv.
Pikemas vaates
Sage tarbimine seostub kõrgema riskiga ebasoodsatele tervisetulemitele, kuid mõju sõltub toitumismustrist.
Loogika: novaGroup === 4.
Signaalid: NOVA grupp on 4 (ultra-töödeldud klass).
NOVA klass on tarbimismustri signaal ega tähenda üksiku toote põhjal automaatset diagnoosi.
Ultra-töödeldud märge aitab vanemal hinnata, kas toode sobib igapäevaseks valikuks või pigem harvemaks.
Miks oluline
Rakendus kuvab selle lisakontekstina, et toetada lapse menüü üldist kvaliteeti, mitte anda mustvalget otsust ühe toote kohta.
Kohe
Võib tekkida kiire söömise ja varasema uue isu muster.
Pikemas vaates
Sage kasutus võib nihutada menüüd vähem täisväärtusliku toiduprofiili poole.
Põhineb peamiselt epidemioloogilisel ja institutsionaalsel kirjandusel ultra-töödeldud toitude tarbimismustrite kohta.
Signaalid: NOVA grupp on 4 (ultra-töödeldud profiil).
high confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage
medium confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage
medium confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage