Open LuciaSegovia opened 3 years ago
Thanks @LuciaSegovia this looks good to me & just a few extra nuances captured below for @bgsandan to check
As a note for future reference, this is suitable because it is robust/sustainable to currently unforeseen food items grown in a fortified form, without hard-coding these relationships into the tool. User support will be created to help BYO users to correctly format their data.
As an extra note to this line, it means that Katie's C-E work will require functionality to 'zero' the fortified items as well as increase their consumption.
Also, to round off we agree that where food is collected as an aggregate (e.g. "vegetables") the user will bring consumption data which splits this into individual food items (perhaps based on FBS or market data available).
@bgsandan also just remembered to make a note that this methodology where we will copy a line of data for a food item and change (for instance) only one nutrient value, means that we need to track the source of each item-nutrient value in the metadata we capture.
Regarding to food fortification we will handle fortification in two ways:
1) Biofortified food items (e.g. orange maize, orange sweet potato): Those items will be includedd as individual food itmes. For FCTs that do not report that food item, they will be adapted from its non-biofortified food item (e.g. white maize, white orage sweet potato)
2) Fortified food items (e.g. fortified sunflower oil, fortified wheat flour): Fortification for these type of items will be included as a third step in the matching process. These food items will be by defult matched to non-fortified items.
Please @LouiseAnder and @bgsandan confirm that I summarized it properly :)