A Correction has been published for this article in http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/77001962/START The identification of changes in the recent trend is an important issue in the analysis of cancer mortality and incidence data. We apply a joinpoint regression model to describe such continuous changes and use the grid‐search method to fit the regression function with unknown joinpoints assuming constant variance and uncorrelated errors. We find the number of significant joinpoints by performing several permutation tests, each of which has a correct significance level asymptotically. Each p‐value is found using Monte Carlo methods, and the overall asymptotic significance level is maintained through a Bonferroni correction. These tests are extended to the situation with non‐constant variance to handle rates with Poisson variation and possibly autocorrelated errors. The performance of these tests are studied via simulations and the tests are applied to U.S. prostate cancer incidence and mortality rates. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The identi"cation of changes in the recent trend is an important issue in the analysis of cancer mortality and incidence data. We apply a joinpoint regression model to describe such continuous changes and use the grid-search method to "t the regression function with unknown joinpoints assuming constant variance and uncorrelated errors. We "nd the number of signi"cant joinpoints by performing several permutation tests, each of which has a correct signi"cance level asymptotically. Each p-value is found using Monte Carlo methods, and the overall asymptotic signi"cance level is maintained through a Bonferroni correction. These tests are extended to the situation with non-constant variance to handle rates with Poisson variation and possibly autocorrelated errors. The performance of these tests are studied via simulations and the tests are applied to U.S. prostate cancer incidence and mortality rates.

Researchers at the National Cancer Institute developed a new cognitively based food frequency questionnaire (FFQ), the Diet History Questionnaire (DHQ). The Eating at America's Table Study sought to validate and compare the DHQ with the Block and Willett FFQs. Of 1,640 men and women recruited to participate from a nationally representative sample in 1997, 1,301 completed four telephone 24-hour recalls, one in each season. Participants were randomized to receive either a DHQ and Block FFQ or a DHQ and Willett FFQ. With a standard measurement error model, correlations for energy between estimated truth and the DHQ, Block FFQ, and Willett FFQ, respectively, were 0.48, 0.45, and 0.18 for women and 0.49, 0.45, and 0.21 for men. For 26 nutrients, correlations and attenuation coefficients were somewhat higher for the DHQ versus the Block FFQ, and both were better than the Willett FFQ in models unadjusted for energy. Energy adjustment increased correlations and attenuation coefficients for the Willett FFQ dramatically and for the DHQ and Block FFQ instruments modestly. The DHQ performed best overall. These data show that the DHQ and the Block FFQ are better at estimating absolute intakes than is the Willett FFQ but that, after energy adjustment, all three are more comparable for purposes of assessing diet-disease risk.

This paper describes the Observing Protein and Energy Nutrition (OPEN) Study, conducted from September 1999 to March 2000. The purpose of the study was to assess dietary measurement error using two self-reported dietary instruments-the food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) and the 24-hour dietary recall (24HR)-and unbiased biomarkers of energy and protein intakes: doubly labeled water and urinary nitrogen. Participants were 484 men and women aged 40-69 years from Montgomery County, Maryland. Nine percent of men and 7% of women were defined as underreporters of both energy and protein intake on 24HRs; for FFQs, the comparable values were 35% for men and 23% for women. On average, men underreported energy intake compared with total energy expenditure by 12-14% on 24HRs and 31-36% on FFQs and underreported protein intake compared with a protein biomarker by 11-12% on 24HRs and 30-34% on FFQs. Women underreported energy intake on 24HRs by 16-20% and on FFQs by 34-38% and underreported protein intake by 11-15% on 24HRs and 27-32% on FFQs. There was little underreporting of the percentage of energy from protein for men or women. These findings have important implications for nutritional epidemiology and dietary surveillance.

Multiple-day food records or 24-hour dietary recalls (24HRs) are commonly used as "reference" instruments to calibrate food frequency questionnaires (FFQs) and to adjust findings from nutritional epidemiologic studies for measurement error. Correct adjustment requires that the errors in the adopted reference instrument be independent of those in the FFQ and of true intake. The authors report data from the Observing Protein and Energy Nutrition (OPEN) Study, conducted from September 1999 to March 2000, in which valid reference biomarkers for energy (doubly labeled water) and protein (urinary nitrogen), together with a FFQ and 24HR, were observed in 484 healthy volunteers from Montgomery County, Maryland. Accounting for the reference biomarkers, the data suggest that the FFQ leads to severe attenuation in estimated disease relative risks for absolute protein or energy intake (a true relative risk of 2 would appear as 1.1 or smaller). For protein adjusted for energy intake by using either nutrient density or nutrient residuals, the attenuation is less severe (a relative risk of 2 would appear as approximately 1.3), lending weight to the use of energy adjustment. Using the 24HR as a reference instrument can seriously underestimate true attenuation (up to 60% for energy-adjusted protein). Results suggest that the interpretation of findings from FFQ-based epidemiologic studies of diet-disease associations needs to be reevaluated.