Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Corrigendum: Bi-objective goal programming for balancing costs vs. nutritional adequacy

Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/Letter to the editor › Scientific › peer-review

Abstract

In the published article, there was an error in Table 3 as published. For some food commodities the entries were duplicated, whereas for other food commodities they were not present. The corrected Table 3 and its caption appear below. Cost per 100 g * in Nigerian naira (NGN) and daily allowed intake in grams for food commodities available in Ebonyi. The minimum (Min) and maximum (Max) daily intake are specified for an adolescent male and female in grams. For each food commodity it is specified if it is allowed within a diet type, which reflects the most restrictive diet in which the food can be included. The diet types are abbreviated as follows: OM for omnivore, PC for pescatarian, VE for vegetarian and VG for vegan. Note that the minimum intake for all specified food commodities is zero. For completeness we mention it explicitly in the table. *Cost are obtained from the World Food Programme Nigeria country office. The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.

Original languageEnglish
Article number1239915
Pages (from-to)1239915
Number of pages3
JournalFrontiers in Nutrition
Volume10
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 11 Jul 2023

Keywords

  • Bi-objective
  • Diet optimization
  • Goal programming
  • Linear programming
  • Nutritional adequacy

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Corrigendum: Bi-objective goal programming for balancing costs vs. nutritional adequacy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this