The FFQ seems adequate for ranking subjects according to intake of energy, macronutrients, dietary fibre and retinol, but it does not yield such good results for beta-carotene, vitamin C for men, vitamin E for women.

The questions selected for the short questionnaire are not suitable for estimating energy expenditure at an absolute level. Reproducibility and relative validity of the ranking of subjects seemed satisfactory and comparable to the extensive questionnaire. The results imply that the short questionnaire is suitable for ranking subjects in the EPIC study.

These data show that repeatability is good and relative validity as compared to an activity diary is moderate but well within the range of values found in other studies. The questionnaire is more valid in men than in women.

Introduction: Diagnostic practice for acute abdominal pain at the Emergency Department varies widely and is mostly based on doctor's preferences. We aimed at developing an evidence-based guideline for the diagnostic pathway of patients with abdominal pain of non-traumatic origin. Methods: All available international literature on patients with acute abdominal pain was identified and graded according to their methodological quality by members of the multidisciplinary steering group. A guideline was synthetized, providing evidence-based recommendations together with considerations based on expertise of group members, patient preferences, costs, availability of facilities, and organizational aspects. Conclusions and Recommendations: Definition: Uniform terminology is needed in patients with acute abdominal pain to avoid difficulty in interpretation and ease comparison of findings between studies. We propose the use of the following definition for acute abdominal pain: pain of nontraumatic origin with a maximum duration of 5 days. Clinical diagnosis: Clinical evaluation is advised to differentiate between urgent and nonurgent causes. The diagnostic accuracy of clinical assessment is insufficient to identify the correct diagnosis but can discriminate between urgent and nonurgent causes. Patients suspected of nonurgent diagnoses can safely be reevaluated the next day. Based on current literature, no conclusions can be drawn on the differences in accuracy between residents and specialists. No conclusions can be drawn on the influence of a gynecological consultation. In patients suspected of an urgent condition, additional imaging is justified. CRP and WBC count alone are insufficient to discriminate urgent from nonurgent diagnoses. Diagnostic imaging: There is no place for conventional radiography in the work-up of patients with acute abdominal pain due to the lack of added value on top of clinical assessment. Computed tomography leads to the highest sensitivity and specificity in patients with acute abdominal pain. Positive predictive value of ultrasound is comparable with CT and therefore preferred as the first imaging modality due to the downsides of computed tomography; negative or inconclusive ultrasound is followed by CT. Based on current literature, no conclusions can be drawn on the added value of a diagnostic laparoscopy in the work-up of patients with acute abdominal pain. Antibiotic treatment should be started within the first hour after recognition of sepsis. Administration of opioids (analgesics) decreases the intensity of the pain and does not affect the accuracy of physical examination.

ObjectiveTo provide a comprehensive, evidence-based overview of the risk factors, prevention, diagnosis, imaging, treatment and prognosis for Achilles tendinopathy. To make clinical recommendations for healthcare practitioners and patients.DesignComprehensive multidisciplinary guideline process funded by the Quality Foundation of the Dutch Federation of Medical Specialists. This process included a development, commentary and authorisation phase. Patients participated in every phase.Data sourcesMultiple databases and existing guidelines were searched up to May 2019. Information from patients, healthcare providers and other stakeholders were obtained using a digital questionnaire, focus group interview and invitational conference.Study eligibility criteriaStudies on both insertional and/or midportion Achilles tendinopathy were eligible. Specific eligibility criteria were described per module.Data extraction and synthesisTo appraise the certainty of evidence, reviewers extracted data, assessed risk of bias and used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation method, where applicable. Important considerations were: patient values and preferences, costs, acceptability of other stakeholders and feasibility of implementation. Recommendations were made based on the results of the evidence from the literature and the considerations.Primary outcome measureThe primary and secondary outcome measures were defined per module and defined based on the input of patients obtained in collaboration with the Netherlands Patient Federation and healthcare providers from different professions.ResultsSix specific modules were completed: risk factors and primary prevention, diagnosis, imaging, treatment prognosis and secondary prevention for Achilles tendinopathy.Summary/conclusionOur Dutch multidisciplinary guideline on Achilles tendinopathy provides six modules developed according to the standards of the Dutch Federation of Medical Specialists. Evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice are given for risk factors, prevention, diagnosis, imaging, treatment and prognosis. This guideline can assist healthcare providers and patients in clinical practice.