Validation of 24‐h dietary recall for estimating nutrient intakes and adequacy in adolescents in Burkina Faso

Abstract

Data on dietary nutrient intakes of adolescents in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMIC) is lacking partly due to the absence of validation studies of the 24‐h recall method in adolescents. We conducted a validation study of 24‐h recall (24HR) compared with observed weighed records (OWR) in adolescents (n = 132, 10–11 years; n = 105, 12–14 years). Dietary data were collected for the same day by both methods by conducting the 24HR the day after the OWR. For OWR, all foods consumed by adolescents from the first to last meal of the day were weighed; for 24HR adolescents reported foods consumed using portion aids. Food intakes were converted to nutrients. Nutrient intakes by both methods were tested for equivalence by comparing the ratios (24HR/OWR) with equivalence margins of within ±10%, 15% and 20% of the ratio. Prevalences of inadequacy (POIs) were obtained using the NCI method. Mean ratios for energy were 0.88 and 0.92, for younger and older adolescents, respectively, and other nutrients ranged between 0.84 and 1.02. Energy intakes were equivalent within the 15% bound, and most nutrients fell within the 20% bound. POI was overestimated by 24HR, but differences were less than 25 percentage points for most nutrients. Half of adolescents omitted foods in recalls, mainly sweet or savoury snacks, fruits and beverages. Our study showed that adolescents underestimated intakes by 24HR; however, the degree of underestimation was generally acceptable for 12–14‐year‐olds within a bound of 15%. Errors could possibly be reduced with further training and targeted probing.

Validation of the INDDEX24 mobile app v. a pen-and-paper 24-hour dietary recall using the weighed food record as a benchmark in Burkina Faso

“…Some studies have assessed accuracy of one or the other modality using WFR or biomarkers (53,54) . Numerous validation studies have reported results similar to the present studynamely, that intakes of many nutrients measured by 24HR were not statistically significantly different from WFR, but that some nutrients did show differences and that some modifications may be needed to reduce error (45,55,56,57) . But these did not compare one 24HR modality with another, and few were conducted in LMICs.…”

“…To assess the relative accuracy of the two recall methods, we compared each method to the benchmark (WFR-INDDEX24 and WFR-PAPI) for each nutrient of interest and for the energy contribution from the different FAO/WHO/GIFT food groups. Following the method of Arsenault et al 45 , equivalence tests were done using the two one-sided paired t-test (TOST) between recall method and WFR at the group level. A 10% bound was used to assess equivalence, as suggested by other researchers (46,47) .…”

Factors associated with iron deficiency anaemia among pregnant teenagers in Ashanti Region, Ghana: A hospital-based prospective cohort study

“…The study has limitations. The use of 24 h dietary recalls may lead to over-or under-estimations [ 68 ]. In the present study, we used a 3-day repeated recall to cover up for this.…”

Within-Person Variation in Nutrient Intakes across Populations and Settings: Implications for the Use of External Estimates in Modeling Usual Nutrient Intake Distributions

“…Forty publications and reports representing 24 countries that described studies collecting multiple days of dietary intake data and reported variance component values for nutrient intakes were included in the literature review. While ≥1 estimates were available from a number of countries representing Asia ( 28–41 ), Africa ( 38 , 42 , 43 ), Europe ( 7 , 35 , 44–50 ), and Latin America ( 38 , 51–54 ), the vast majority of available variance component data represented North American populations ( 7 , 8 , 40 , 47 , 55–65 ). In particular, a plethora of variance component ratios are available from 2 nationally representative surveys from the United States, the Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII) and NHANES, including from different survey years and a wide range of age and sex subgroups ( 7 , 8 , 47 , 57 , 62 , 65 ).…”

“…The potential composite effects of these factors on variance ratios are difficult to discern. In 2 studies comparing observed weighed food records with 24HRs collected for the same days, variance ratios from weighed food records were observed to be lower ( 98 ) or different but in an inconsistent direction across nutrients ( 43 ). In the current analysis, disparities in variance component ratios among women in rural Bangladesh were found between 2 datasets ( 21 , 70 ) that used different dietary assessment methods (e.g., WIV:total of folate intake was 0.68 from weighed food records vs. 0.91 from 24HRs), although differences in the regions studied, the survey year, or other factors could have contributed to the variation.…”