Purpose Food choice at work (FCW) is a workplace nutrition company that delivers healthy programmes and catering support to employers, primarily in Ireland. It uses a bespoke digital platform to analyse recipes and menus and inform menu labelling, for workplace catering. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the agreement between FCW’s nutritional analysis software and two other dietary assessment tools – Nutritics™ and MyFood24. Design/methodology/approach In all, 12 recipes were randomly selected from the FCW database and analysed using FCW, Nutritics™ and MyFood24. Nutritional outputs were compared using descriptive statistics, Bland–Altman plots and Pearson’s correlation coefficients (p ≤ 0.05). Findings Macronutrient estimates were generally consistent, though energy content showed the greatest variability (mean difference: +23 kcal between FCW and Nutritics™; range: −3.2–101 kcal). Protein values were highest in FCW (+0.9 g vs MyFood24, p 0.001). Fat and saturated fat estimates differed significantly between FCW and MyFood24 (fat: −1.0 g, p = 0.021; saturated fat: −0.17 g, p 0.001). Salt content showed notable discrepancies; FCW estimates were 36.4% lower than MyFood24. Among micronutrients, vitamin A and D exhibited the largest differences (vitamin A: −145 µg vs Nutritics™, p = 0.05; vitamin D: −0.37 µg vs Nutritics™, p 0.001). Bland–Altman analysis revealed the greatest bias between FCW and MyFood24 across all macronutrients. Research limitations/implications While overall agreement was acceptable, significant differences in calories, salt and micronutrients highlight the importance of understanding methodological differences when selecting dietary analysis tools. FCW software provides a standardised methodology suitable for workplace nutrition analysis in Ireland and the UK. Practical implications This study highlights the importance of selecting appropriate nutritional analysis software in workplace health initiatives. Although FCW’s in-house tool shows general alignment with validated platforms, notable discrepancies in energy, salt and micronutrient values may impact menu labelling and dietary guidance. Organisations using such software should verify accuracy, especially for nutrients influencing health claims or compliance with public health guidelines. FCW and Nutritics™ demonstrated stronger agreement, supporting their use in workplace nutrition settings in Ireland and the UK. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study in Ireland and the UK to compare the accuracy of commonly used nutritional analysis software, including an in-house tool developed for workplace health promotion. By assessing agreement between FCW, Nutritics™ and MyFood24, this research provides new evidence on variability in recipe-level nutrient estimates. The findings of this study offer practical guidance for dietitians, foodservice providers and public health professionals in selecting appropriate software for menu planning, nutrition labelling and employee wellness programmes.
Cushen et al. (Mon,) studied this question.