Objective: To evaluate the validity, reliability and sensitivity of a computerised single day 24-h recall questionnaire designed for the comparison of children's fruit and snack consumption at the group (school) level. Design: Relative validity and reliability were assessed in relation to (i) intake at school and (ii) intake throughout the whole day, using diary-assisted 24-h recall interviews and a 7-day test-retest procedure. Sensitivity was assessed in relation to intake by comparing results from schools with differing food policies, and by sex. Subjects and setting: Eight schools took part in the validity and reliability assessments, with 78 children completing the 24-h recall interviews and 195 children completing the test-retest procedure. A total of 43 schools (1890 children) took part in the sensitivity analysis. All children were aged 9-11 y. All schools were in South Wales and South-west England. Results: For fruit intake at school, the questionnaire showed fair levels of validity at the individual level (kappa ¼ 0.29). At the group level, there were little or no differences in fruit intake at school between the two measures and two occasions. The questionnaire was sufficiently sensitive to identify statistically significant differences between girls and boys, and between schools with different food policies. For snack intake at school, validity at the individual level was slightly lower (kappa ¼ 0.22-0.25), but the data remained of value in analyses at the group level. For fruit and snack intake throughout the whole day there was little agreement at the individual level (kappa ¼ 0.00-0.06), and at the group level there tended to be substantial differences between the two measures and two occasions. Conclusions: The computerised questionnaire is a quick and cost-effective means of assessing children's consumption of fruit at school. While further development is required to improve validity and reliability, it has the potential to be particularly useful in randomised controlled trials of school-based dietary interventions.

3921 adults randomly selected from across Great Britain were interviewed. Subjects were asked to assess a selection of 10 out of 200 vignettes. Each vignette contained four elements: a category of individual; access to some or all of the health record; specified purpose; and level of patient identifier. Subjects were asked to say how happy they would be to allow access to their health record in the circumstances described.The public were generally happy to provide access to health information. For almost a third of vignettes, subjects said that they would be very happy to allow access to their health information. 9.1% of subjects said that they would be very happy to allow access within all of the vignettes that they were asked to assess. There was however, a significant minority of responses (11.6%) to vignettes where subjects said that they would be very unhappy to allow access. In addition 2.1% of individuals said that they were very unhappy with all of the vignettes presented to them. Individuals from higher social groups, older people and males were more likely to be happy with access to their health information. The individual requesting information was the most important factor determining permission to access health information. Subjects were happier to release anonymised rather than personally identifiable data. Content of the information to be released did not seem to be that important, even when the health record contained sensitive information. With the exception of teaching students, the use of the information wasn't an important determinant of consent.Despite a level of support for use of health information in most circumstances, this doesn't mean that patients don't want to be asked for consent, nor that the views of the small minority can be ignored. The ethical and policy implications of these findings will be discussed.