Validation of energy intake estimated from a food frequency questionnaire: a doubly labelled water study

Andersen, Lene Frost; Tomten, Heidi; Haggarty, Paul; Lövö, Arne; Hustvedt, Bo-Egil

doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601519

Cited by 73 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, a number of previous validation studies of FFQ in women have reported underestimation of EI when compared with TEE measured by the DLW method (5,6,26,27) . In one study, EI assessed using a 180-item FFQ was underestimated by 10 % among Norwegian women (5) , and in a large study, conducted in the USA, the underestimation of EI was 34 % using a 124-item FFQ (26) . The results of the present study showed that the women who were overweight or obese underestimated their EI to a greater extent than the normal-weight women using both the SDQ and the FFQ, which is consistent with previous results of studies relating misreporting of EI to body weight (28,29) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Dietary intake assessment in women with different weight and pregnancy status using a short questionnaire

Svensson

Renström

Bluck

et al. 2013

Public Health Nutr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: First, to evaluate the ability of a short dietary questionnaire (SDQ) to estimate energy intake (EI) on group and individual levels compared with total energy expenditure (TEE) measured by the doubly labelled water method. Second, to compare the SDQ's performance in estimating energy, nutrient and food intakes with a sixty-six-item FFQ used in large-scale Swedish epidemiological research. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: Umeå, Sweden. Subjects: In total, sixty-five non-pregnant women, of whom thirty-one were overweight or obese, and twenty-five pregnant, normal-weight women completed the protocol. Results: On average, the SDQ captured 78 % and 79 % of absolute TEE in the non-pregnant and pregnant normal-weight women, respectively. Furthermore, the SDQ captured an average of 57 % of TEE in the overweight/obese nonpregnant women. The Spearman correlation of EI and TEE was significant in the overweight and obese women only (r 5 0?37, 95 % CI 0?02, 0?64). There was no significant difference between the SDQ and the more extensive FFQ in the ability to assess EI when compared with TEE. Intakes of most nutrients and foods were significantly higher when assessed with the SDQ compared with the FFQ. Conclusions: A new short dietary questionnaire with an alternative design underestimated EI of non-pregnant and pregnant, overweight and obese women on a group level but was able to rank the overweight/obese women according to EI. Furthermore, the short questionnaire captured as much or more of the energy, nutrient and food intakes of non-pregnant normal-weight and overweight/obese women on the group level as a traditional, more extensive FFQ. Keywords Body weight Dietary intake Doubly labelled water FFQ Non-pregnant and pregnant women ValidityThere is a need for quick and easy-to-administer dietary assessment tools with low respondent burden that give valid intake data in large-scale population studies and that are able to rank participants according to intake. The FFQ method is most often used in epidemiological studies (1) , since it is easy to administer at a relatively low cost and estimates habitual dietary intake over an extended time period (2) . A valid FFQ can be used to rank individuals according to reported intake and, if it includes portion size estimations, to assess absolute individual intakes (3) .However, a problem with all self-report dietary assessment methods is the misreporting of energy intake (EI) (4) . Dietary intake in young, weight-conscious women can be especially difficult to assess accurately, and previous studies in women show underestimation of EI when assessed using FFQ by comparison with total energy expenditure (TEE) measured by the doubly labelled water (DLW) method (5,6) . Furthermore, it has repeatedly been shown that for overweight and obese individuals EI is underestimated to a higher extent than for their normalweight counterparts (6)(7)(8)(9) . One biomarker study suggested that the FFQ worked better in detecting the higher EI in obese women when compared with the 24...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Dietary intake assessment in women with different weight and pregnancy status using a short questionnaire

Svensson

Renström

Bluck

et al. 2013

Public Health Nutr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, the sample size was relatively large compared to the previous studies with the same purpose and method (Sawaya et al, 1996;Kroke et al, 1999;Andersen et al, 2003).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several validation studies have shown that dietary assessment instruments underestimated daily energy intake (Livingstone et al, 1990;Hill and Davis, 2001). The degree of such error, under-or overestimation, has also been examined using TEE measured by the DLW method (Sawaya et al, 1996;Kroke et al, 1999;Andersen et al, 2003;Livingstone and Black, 2003). Average underreporting in the previous studies between EI from dietary assessment questionnaires and TEE measured by DLW ranged from 10 to 38% (Sawaya et al, 1996;Subar et al, 2003), which depends on sample size and subjects (Trabulsi and Schoeller, 2001).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Validation of self-reported energy intake by a self-administered diet history questionnaire using the doubly labeled water method in 140 Japanese adults

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To validate reported energy intake (rEI) with a self-administered diet history questionnaire (DHQ) against total energy expenditure (TEE) by the doubly labeled water (DLW) method. Subjects: A total of 140 healthy Japanese adults (67 men and 73 women) aged 20-59 years living in four areas in Japan. Methods: Energy intake was assessed twice with DHQ over a 1-month period before and after TEE measurement (rEI DHQ1 and rEI DHQ2 , respectively). TEE was measured by DLW during 2 weeks (TEE DLW ). Results: Mean rEI DHQ1 was lower than those of TEE DLW by 1.972.4 MJ/day (16.4%, Po0.001) for men and 0.671.9 MJ/day (6.0%, Po0.01) for women. In men and women together, 62 subjects (44%) were defined as underreporters (rEI DHQ1 /TEE DLW o0.84), 58 (41%) as acceptable reporters (0.84-1.16) and 20 (14%) as over-reporters (41.16). Pearson correlation coefficient was 0.34 for men and 0.22 for women. After adjustment for the dietary and non-dietary factors related to rEI DHQ1 /TEE DLW , the correlation coefficient improved to 0.42 and 0.37, respectively. Conclusion: The energy intake assessed with DHQ correlated low to modestly with TEE measured by DLW. In addition, DHQ underestimated energy intake at a group level. Caution is needed when energy intake was evaluated by DHQ at both individual and group levels.

show abstract

“…(Andersen et al, 2003). CVTEE denotes within-participant variation coefficient in TEE measured by DLW (8.8%).…”

Section: Total Energy Expenditure Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characteristics of women who frequently under report their energy intake: a doubly labelled water study

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Objectives: We applied three dietary assessment methods and aimed at obtaining a set of physical, social and psychological variables that can discriminate those individuals who did not underreport ('never under-reporters'), those who underreported in one dietary assessment method ('occasional under-reporters') and those who underreported in two or three dietary assessment methods ('frequent under-reporters'). Participants/Methods: Sixty-five women aged 18-57 years were recruited for this study. Total energy expenditure was determined by doubly labelled water, and energy intake was estimated by three 24-h diet recalls, 3-day food records and a food frequency questionnaire. A multiple discriminant analysis was used to identify which of those variables better discriminated the three groups: body mass index (BMI), income, education, social desirability, nutritional knowledge, dietary restraint, physical activity practice, body dissatisfaction and binge-eating symptoms. Results: Twenty-three participants were 'never under-reporters'. Twenty-four participants were 'occasional under-reporters' and 18 were 'frequent under-reporters'. Four variables entered the discriminant model: income, BMI, social desirability and body dissatisfaction. According to potency indices, income contributed the most to the total discriminant power, followed in decreasing order by social desirability score, BMI and body dissatisfaction. Income, social desirability and BMI were the characteristics that mainly separated the 'never under-reporters' from the under-reporters (occasional or frequent). Body dissatisfaction better discriminated the 'occasional under-reporters' from the 'frequent under-reporters'. Conclusions: 'Frequent under-reporters' have a greater BMI, social desirability score, body dissatisfaction score and lower income. These four variables seemed to be able to discriminate individuals who are more prone to systematic under reporting.

show abstract

Validation of energy intake estimated from a food frequency questionnaire: a doubly labelled water study

Cited by 73 publications

References 15 publications

Dietary intake assessment in women with different weight and pregnancy status using a short questionnaire

Dietary intake assessment in women with different weight and pregnancy status using a short questionnaire

Validation of self-reported energy intake by a self-administered diet history questionnaire using the doubly labeled water method in 140 Japanese adults

Characteristics of women who frequently under report their energy intake: a doubly labelled water study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About