Evaluation and Comparison of Food Records, Recalls, and Frequencies for Energy and Protein Assessment by Using Recovery Biomarkers

Abstract

The food frequency questionnaire approach to dietary assessment is ubiquitous in nutritional epidemiology research. Food records and recalls provide approaches that may also be adaptable for use in large epidemiologic cohorts, if warranted by better measurement properties. The authors collected (2007-2009) a 4-day food record, three 24-hour dietary recalls, and a food frequency questionnaire from 450 postmenopausal women in the Women's Health Initiative prospective cohort study (enrollment, 1994-1998), along with biomarkers of energy and protein consumption. Through comparison with biomarkers, the food record is shown to provide a stronger estimate of energy and protein than does the food frequency questionnaire, with 24-hour recalls mostly intermediate. Differences were smaller and nonsignificant for protein density. Food frequencies, records, and recalls were, respectively, able to "explain" 3.8%, 7.8%, and 2.8% of biomarker variation for energy; 8.4%, 22.6%, and 16.2% of biomarker variation for protein; and 6.5%, 11.0%, and 7.0% of biomarker variation for protein density. However, calibration equations that include body mass index, age, and ethnicity substantially improve these numbers to 41.7%, 44.7%, and 42.1% for energy; 20.3%, 32.7%, and 28.4% for protein; and 8.7%, 14.4%, and 10.4% for protein density. Calibration equations using any of the assessment procedures may yield suitable consumption estimates for epidemiologic study purposes.

Dietary biomarker evaluation in a controlled feeding study in women from the Women’s Health Initiative cohort ,

“…Thus, self-report assessment limits our ability to draw inferences concerning diet-disease associations. Consistent with the larger body of evidence (9-16), we showed previously in Women's Health Initiative (WHI) 12 cohorts that there was systematic bias related to underreporting (w30-50%) of energy intake among overweight and obese women, that younger postmenopausal women underreport energy more than do older women, and that reporting bias for protein is similar but less pronounced (17,18). These data have been used to develop calibrated energy and protein consumption estimates in the WHI (17,18).…”

“…Consistent with the larger body of evidence (9-16), we showed previously in Women's Health Initiative (WHI) 12 cohorts that there was systematic bias related to underreporting (w30-50%) of energy intake among overweight and obese women, that younger postmenopausal women underreport energy more than do older women, and that reporting bias for protein is similar but less pronounced (17,18). These data have been used to develop calibrated energy and protein consumption estimates in the WHI (17,18). Disease associations are mostly absent without calibration in the WHI, but bias-corrected (calibrated) energy and protein are typically positively related to chronic disease risk (1,(19)(20)(21).…”

“…The NPAAS-FS was implemented in a subset of 153 women who had consented to participate in the WHI Extension Study (27). Women were eligible to participate in the NPAAS-FS if they 1) were currently enrolled in the WHI Extension Study; 2) previously had been included in the Observational Study cohort, Dietary Modification Trial Comparison (nonintervention) group, or Hormone Therapy Trials [including having participated previously in the Nutrition Biomarker Study (17) and original Nutrition and Physical Activity Assessment Study (18)]; 3) had a deliverable address and a zip code in King or surrounding counties in Washington State (Seattle area); 4) were of full follow-up status within the WHI; 5) were #80 y of age as of April 2011 (when the list of eligible women was compiled); and 6) did not have medical conditions that would preclude successful completion of the protocol (including, but not limited to, diabetes, kidney disease, bladder incontinence requiring the use of special garments or medications, or routine use of oxygen). A list of 450 WHI participants eligible for the NPAAS-FS was provided by the WHI Clinical Coordinating Center (Figure 1).…”

“…Typically, feeding studies use the same standardized menus for all participants, thereby reducing the variation in nutrient intakes as well as the variance introduced by food type, handling and storage, preparation, and processing, but they depart from participants' habitual diets. To apply a controlled feeding study to dietary biomarker assessment, but preserve the normal variation in nutrient and food consumption at the individual level in the study population, we designed an individual menu plan for each woman that mimicked her habitual food intake as estimated by using a 4-d food record (4DFR) and adjusted for energy requirements on the basis of calibrated energy estimates (17,18) and standard energy estimating equations (26).…”

Predicting fat-free mass index and sarcopenia: A pilot study in community-dwelling older adults

“…All but two participants returned their 3-day food records. Although food records have been shown to provide more accurate results than food frequency questionnaires (Prentice et al 2011), this may have been a limitation, as these records were heavily dependent on accurate descriptions. Multiple lab assistants input these records, which may also have had an effect on the accuracy of their results.…”