Agreement in Participant-Coded and Investigator-Coded Food-Record Analysis in Overweight Research Participants: An Examination of Interpretation Bias

Bjorge-Schohl, Brooke; Johnston, Carol S.; Trier, Catherine M.; Fleming, Katie

doi:10.1016/j.jand.2013.08.024

Cited by 7 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For this reason, we opted to include only those aged 12 years or older in our study. Previous studies reported only moderate agreement between ASA24 results and those of an expert-coded multi-day food record (8)(9)(10)(11)(12) . A study by Bjorge-Schohl et al found that intra-class correlation coefficients between a participant-coded record in ASA24 and the same record coded by an investigator using a commercial database (ESHA) ranged from 0•65 to 0•81 for macronutrients and from 0•50 to 0•66 for micronutrients (8) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…A small number of studies have compared the ASA24 (adult version) web-based recall with interviewer-administered dietary recalls or expertcoded food records in terms of nutrient output in adults (8)(9)(10)(11)(12) . Results of these studies have been equivocal, some showing no difference in food and nutrient intakes between methods (13) and others finding moderate agreement in nutrient intake (8,9) or a slight superiority of the AMPM in adults estimating true intake over the ASA24 (10) . While there are few studies assessing the ability of webbased, self-administered 24 h recalls to accurately collect dietary information in adults, there are even fewer in children and adolescents.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of an interviewer-administered with an automated self-administered 24 h (ASA24) dietary recall in adolescents

Hughes

Summer

Ollberding

et al. 2017

Public Health Nutr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of an interviewer-administered with an automated self-administered 24 h (ASA24) dietary recall in adolescents

Hughes

Summer

Ollberding

et al. 2017

Public Health Nutr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mismatched food items may explain the under-reporting of vitamin C and vitamin B12 intake in this study. Another ASA24 validation study found vitamin C values differed when participants entered foods eaten into a nutrient database instead of the investigators [25]. The under-reporting of vitamin B12 intake may be an artifact of this study design.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a study validating the Automated Multiple-Pass Method (on which the ASA24 was based), obese women overestimated their macronutrient intake [29]. A study comparing investigator versus participant-entered dietary intake suggested inaccurate portion size estimates by ASA24 users may have led to nutrient differences [25]. In this study, nutrients found in dairy, such as calcium and vitamin D, were reported at a level significantly higher than actually consumed (9.4% and 16.1%, respectively).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Potential Tool for Clinicians; Evaluating a Computer-Led Dietary Assessment Method in Overweight and Obese Women during Weight Loss

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many Americans are attempting to lose weight with the help of healthcare professionals. Clinicians can improve weight loss results by using technology. Accurate dietary assessment is crucial to effective weight loss. The aim of this study was to validate a computer-led dietary assessment method in overweight/obese women. Known dietary intake was compared to Automated Self-Administered 24-h recall (ASA24) reported intake in women (n = 45), 19–50 years, with body mass index of 27–39.9 kg/m2. Participants received nutrition education and reduced body weight by 4%–10%. Participants completed one unannounced dietary recall and their responses were compared to actual intake. Accuracy of the recall and characteristics of respondent error were measured using linear and logistic regression. Energy was underreported by 5% with no difference for most nutrients except carbohydrates, vitamin B12, vitamin C, selenium, calcium and vitamin D (p = 0.002, p < 0.0001, p = 0.022, p = 0.010, p = 0.008 and p = 0.001 respectively). Overall, ASA24 is a valid dietary assessment tool in overweight/obese women participating in a weight loss program. The automated features eliminate the need for clinicians to be trained, to administer, or to analyze dietary intake. Computer-led dietary assessment tools should be considered as part of clinician-supervised weight loss programs.

show abstract

“…Typically patients, clients, or study participants are taught to record their intake for a specified number of consecutive days, with record length of ≥3 days deemed as appropriate for usual diet representation [ 4 ]. Absent biomarkers, the DR is often considered the “gold standard” for determination of actual food intake and is generally utilized as the evaluation tool for determining the validity of other dietary assessment methods [ 5 , 6 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity of Electronic Diet Recording Nutrient Estimates Compared to Dietitian Analysis of Diet Records: Randomized Controlled Trial

Raatz¹,

Scheett²,

Johnson³

et al. 2015

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDietary intake assessment with diet records (DR) is a standard research and practice tool in nutrition. Manual entry and analysis of DR is time-consuming and expensive. New electronic tools for diet entry by clients and research participants may reduce the cost and effort of nutrient intake estimation.ObjectiveTo determine the validity of electronic diet recording, we compared responses to 3-day DR kept by Tap & Track software for the Apple iPod Touch and records kept on the Nutrihand website to DR coded and analyzed by a research dietitian into a customized US Department of Agriculture (USDA) nutrient analysis program, entitled GRAND (Grand Forks Research Analysis of Nutrient Data).MethodsAdult participants (n=19) enrolled in a crossover-designed clinical trial. During each of two washout periods, participants kept a written 3-day DR. In addition, they were randomly assigned to enter their DR in a Web-based dietary analysis program (Nutrihand) or a handheld electronic device (Tap & Track). They completed an additional 3-day DR and the alternate electronic diet recording methods during the second washout. Entries resulted in 228 daily diet records or 12 for each of 19 participants. Means of nutrient intake were calculated for each method. Concordance of the intake estimates were determined by Bland-Altman plots. Coefficients of determination (R 2) were calculated for each comparison to assess the strength of the linear relationship between methods.ResultsNo significant differences were observed between the mean nutrient values for energy, carbohydrate, protein, fat, saturated fatty acids, total fiber, or sodium between the recorded DR analyzed in GRAND and either Nutrihand or Tap & Track, or for total sugars comparing GRAND and Tap & Track. Reported values for total sugars were significantly reduced (P<.05) comparing Nutrihand to GRAND. Coefficients of determination (R 2) for Nutrihand and Tap & Track compared to DR entries into GRAND, respectively, were energy .56, .01; carbohydrate .58, .08; total fiber .65, .37; sugar .78, .41; protein .44, .03; fat .36, .03; saturated fatty acids .23, .03; sodium .20, .00; and for Nutrihand only for cholesterol .88; vitamin A .02; vitamin C .37; calcium .05; and iron .77. Bland-Altman analysis demonstrates high variability in individual responses for both electronic capture programs with higher 95% limits of agreement for dietary intake recorded on Tap & Track.ConclusionsIn comparison to dietitian-entered 3-day DR, electronic methods resulted in no significant difference in mean nutrient estimates but exhibited larger variability, particularly the Tap & Track program. However, electronic DR provided mean estimates of energy, macronutrients, and some micronutrients, which approximated those of the dietitian-analyzed DR and may be appropriate for dietary monitoring of groups. Electronic diet assessment methods have the potential to reduce the cost and burden of DR analysis for nutrition research and clinical practice.Trial RegistrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT01183520; h...

show abstract

Agreement in Participant-Coded and Investigator-Coded Food-Record Analysis in Overweight Research Participants: An Examination of Interpretation Bias

Cited by 7 publications

References 19 publications

Comparison of an interviewer-administered with an automated self-administered 24 h (ASA24) dietary recall in adolescents

Comparison of an interviewer-administered with an automated self-administered 24 h (ASA24) dietary recall in adolescents

A Potential Tool for Clinicians; Evaluating a Computer-Led Dietary Assessment Method in Overweight and Obese Women during Weight Loss

Validity of Electronic Diet Recording Nutrient Estimates Compared to Dietitian Analysis of Diet Records: Randomized Controlled Trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About