New Feedback: Again I'm trying to comment on...

[MicronutrientSupportBot]

New feedback report from tool interface

• Reported: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 01:15:03 GMT
• Page: https://develop--micronutrientsupport-tool.netlify.app/quick-maps/diet/baseline?country-id=MWI&mnd-id=Energy&measure=diet&age-gender-group-id=WRA&sm=0&si=
• Browser: Chrome: 101.0.4951
• OS: Windows 10

• Screen: 1280px / 609 px

  Comment

  Again I'm trying to comment on the pop-up box. This is for energy intake, and it says "prevalence of inadequate intake (EAR):...". There is no EAR for energy, so we need to modify the default text for the "other" nutrients for which it is not relevant.

  Rating

  0/5

  Screenshot

  

[bgsandan]

Hi @kpitten - When you say "there is no EAR for energy", is that that the comparison threshold should be called something else, or that we shouldn't have a comparison to a threshold value at all?

The current data source used for the thresholds contains a value for 'EAR' for Energy (though this could be a data issue)

(the tool averages the EAR value(s) for women aged between 18 and 29 inclusive and uses them for calculations)

What would you expect to see in this case? Is it just that it needs to be labelled as something else or is there an issue with the data/calculations being done?

[kpitten]

For energy it’s simply an “energy requirement”, not an EAR. And the specific energy requirement is based on assumptions about weight and physical activity level. I believe the values Kevin used for the energy requirements were from this FAO reference https://www.fao.org/3/y5686e/y5686e.pdf, though we should check with him regarding what he assumed about weight and physical activity level.

From: Andrew Bean @.> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2022 6:53 AM To: micronutrientsupport/feedback-imagery @.> Cc: Katherine Adams @.>; Mention @.> Subject: Re: [micronutrientsupport/feedback-imagery] New Feedback: Again I'm trying to comment on... (Issue #67)

Hi @kpittenhttps://github.com/kpitten - When you say "there is no EAR for energy", is that that the comparison threshold should be called something else, or that we shouldn't have a comparison to a threshold value at all?

The current data source used for the thresholds contains a value for 'EAR' for Energy (though this could be a data issue) [image]https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/39411049/165947432-ee0aca08-e1a5-4d04-9eca-4c811ea6881a.png (the tool averages the EAR value(s) for women aged between 18 and 29 inclusive and uses them for calculations)

What would you expect to see in this case? Is it just that it needs to be labelled as something else or is there an issue with the data/calculations being done?

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/micronutrientsupport/feedback-imagery/issues/67#issuecomment-1113277464, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJAPOVCA2TL4NIWRAXTACIDVHPLT7ANCNFSM5UUHTHYA. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.**@.>>