Accuracy of reporting dietary intake using various portion-size aids in-person and via telephone

Godwin, Sandria; Chambers, Edgar; Cleveland, Linda

doi:10.1016/j.jada.2004.01.006

Cited by 68 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Poor estimation of portion size has been long recognized (Lansky and Brownell, 1982;Weber et al, 2001), yet it presents a significant problem for estimating energy intake (Harnack et al, 2004). Reports of greater than 20% over-and underestimation are consistent with our observations (Godwin et al, 2004). In many cases, there were practical explanations for why these and other types of errors occurred.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Identifying sources of reporting error using measured food intake

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To investigate the magnitude and relative contribution of different sources of measurement errors present in the estimation of food intake via the 24-h recall technique. Design: We applied variance decomposition methods to the difference between data obtained from the USDA's Automated Multiple Pass Method (AMPM) 24-h recall technique and measured food intake (MFI) from a 16-week cafeteria-style feeding study. The average and the variance of biases, defined as the difference between AMPM and MFI, were analyzed by macronutrient content, subject and nine categories of foods. Subjects: Twelve healthy, lean men (age, 3979 year; weight, 79.978.3 kg; and BMI, 24.171.4 kg/m 2 ). Results: Mean food intakes for AMPM and MFI were not significantly different (no overall bias), but within-subject differences for energy (EI), protein, fat and carbohydrate intakes were 14, 18, 23 and 15% of daily intake, respectively. Mass (incorrect portion size) and deletion (subject did not report foods eaten) errors were each responsible for about one-third of the total error. Vegetables constituted 8% of EI but represented 425% of the error across macronutrients, whereas grains that contributed 32% of EI contributed only 12% of the error across macronutrients. Conclusions: Although the major sources of reporting error were mass and deletion errors, individual subjects differed widely in the magnitude and types of errors they made.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Identifying sources of reporting error using measured food intake

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There were one participant with only one and two participants with two 24-h dietary recalls, which were only on weekdays. Three-dimensional food models were used during each interview to help participants accurately estimate their intakes and to prevent reporting errors as a result of misunderstanding of portion sizes (Godwin et al, 2004).…”

Section: Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of a culturally appropriate quantitative food frequency questionnaire for Inuvialuit population in the Northwest Territories, Canada

Pakseresht

Sharma

2010

J Human Nutrition Diet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The estimation of dietary intake in population‐based studies is often assessed by a food frequency questionnaire (FFQ). This present study aimed to establish the validity of a 142‐item quantitative FFQ (QFFQ) developed to assess dietary intake in a population living in the Northwest Territories, Canada, and undergoing rapid nutrition transition. Methods: Sixty‐four randomly selected Inuvialuit adults were recruited. The mean of one to three 24‐h recalls was used as the reference to measure the validity of the QFFQ. Spearman rank correlations (ρ), cross‐classification and weighted kappa were computed as measures of concordance, adjusting for the daily dietary intake variations in the recalls. Bland – Altman plots were used for additional assessment. Results: Four participants with daily energy intake of >25.1 MJ were not included in the analysis. For all nutrients, mean daily intake estimations were higher from the QFFQ than from the recalls. De‐attenuated ρ’s for macronutrients ranged from 0.33 (protein) to 0.45 (carbohydrate). The best de‐attenuated ρ amongst micronutrients was observed for vitamin C (0.53). Overall correlation between the two dietary tools improved after correction for within‐person variance (from 0.32 to 0.35). When nutrient intakes were categorised into quartiles, the QFFQ and 24‐h recalls indicated relative agreement (same or adjacent quartiles) for 77% for energy and macronutrients, 86% for total sugar and 72% for micronutrients. Bland–Altman plots showed a tendency for increased scatter of the differences at higher intakes. Conclusions: The QFFQ developed is valid and can be used to assess usual dietary intake and dietary adequacy, determine the contribution of foods to specific nutrient intakes, and identify dietary risk factors for chronic disease amongst Inuvialuit.

show abstract

“…However, there is a crucial need to determine the error level induced by such an approach (8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13) .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and evaluation of a photographic atlas as a tool for dietary assessment studies in Middle East cultures

Tueni

Mounayar

Birlouez‐Aragon³

2012

Public Health Nutr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To assess the errors between estimates of amounts based on photographs and actual quantities of food presented to adults or eaten on the previous day. Design: A photographic atlas was constructed by taking digital photographs of three pre-weighed portion sizes of 212 traditional Lebanese dishes. In a first approach, ten portions of real pre-weighed foods were assessed using the photographic atlas. In a second approach, the participants weighed all foods consumed at one meal and recalled the amount of food that was eaten the previous day using the photographic atlas. Differences between actual quantities and estimation were assessed using a signed rank test (P , 0?05). Spearman's correlation coefficients and bias (Bland-Altman plot) between the methods were calculated. Setting: Lebanese university canteen and Lebanese homes. Subjects: Forty adults (twenty males, twenty females) completed the first protocol and fifty adults (twenty-five males, twenty-five females) completed the second protocol; all were volunteers aged 21 to 62 years. Results: Mean differences between actual and estimated portion sizes by photographs were between 213?1 % and 124?5 % when pre-weighed foods were presented, and between 210?4 % and 13?8 % when foods were consumed the day before. No significant differences were found between actual and estimated portion sizes except for three dishes (loubieh bil zeit, tabbouleh and yachnet bazella). Bland-Altman plots showed good agreement for all dishes with a negligible bias of 20?2 g between estimated and presented portions, and 26?3 g between estimated and eaten portions. Conclusions: In the Lebanese diet, food photographs seem a reliable tool for quantification of food portion sizes.

show abstract

Accuracy of reporting dietary intake using various portion-size aids in-person and via telephone

Cited by 68 publications

References 32 publications

Identifying sources of reporting error using measured food intake

Identifying sources of reporting error using measured food intake

Validation of a culturally appropriate quantitative food frequency questionnaire for Inuvialuit population in the Northwest Territories, Canada

Development and evaluation of a photographic atlas as a tool for dietary assessment studies in Middle East cultures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About