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
60
/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
Eau, farine de maïs, sel, speck déshydraté (1%) (şpeck, sel, dextrose, arômes), fromage en poudre (0,4%) (fromage en poudre, lactosérum en poudre, sel de fonte; citrate de sodium), correcteur d'acidité; acide tartrique, arôme, oignon frit (oignons, huile de tournesol), bouillon de cube (sel, maltodextrine, extrait pour bouillon, extraits de levure (gluten d'orge), huile d'oliye, oignón en poudre, poireau en poudre, tomate en poudre, aîl en poudre), çiboulette, conservațeur: acide sorbique. Allergènes: gluten, lait et produits laitiers. Peut contenir des traces d'oeuf.
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
60
/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 85/100
High reliability
The data is strong and the assessment carries high confidence.
Confidence layer
Category breakdown
The overall assessment is good, but some areas warrant further review.
Nutrition profile
Quite good
60/100
60
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
57/100
57
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
Isolated or heavily fractionated ingredients (2 markers) support a more processed classification.
Impact: medium
A long ingredient list (47 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

Polenta. Ingredients: eau, farine de mais, la préparation des aliments sur la base cle champignons et de truffes (3%) (champignons 66% (Agaricus bisporus), eau, huile de tournesol, de ( hapelure (farine de blé, levure, sel), sel, truffe noire (Tuber aestivum) 1%, persil, épices, ail en poudre, poivre en poudre), sel, correcteur d'acidité : acide tartaric Je, conservateur : acide sorbique. Il contient aluten, peut contenir d traces de lan et œuf.. Evidence quality: high
nutrition score
Score summary
65
Nutrition score
label quality is the strongest signal right now, while processing needs the most caution.
Data confidence
80/100
high reliability
high confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

Polenta. Ingredients: Eau, semoule de mais précuite, lait écrémé en poudre, beurre, sel, poivre.. Fabriqué dans un atelier utilisant: gluten, oeufs, soja, sésame et fruits à coque.. Evidence quality: high
nutrition score
Score summary
62
Nutrition score
label quality is the strongest signal right now, while processing needs the most caution.
Data confidence
80/100
high reliability

Polenta. Ingredients: Eau, semoule de maïs* 17,3%, sel marin.. Evidence quality: high
nutrition score
Score summary
65
Nutrition score
label quality is the strongest signal right now, while processing needs the most caution.
Data confidence
87/100
high 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
high confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage