Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-99c86f546-45s75 Total loading time: 0.173 Render date: 2021-12-08T04:10:11.821Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Comparison of dietary assessment methods in nutritional epidemiology: weighed records v. 24 h recalls, food-frequency questionnaires and estimated-diet records

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

S. A. Bingham
Affiliation:
MRC Dunn Clinical Nutrition Centre, 100 Tennis Court Road, Cambridge CB2 lQL
C. Gill
Affiliation:
MRC Biostatistics Unit, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge CB2 2SR
A. Welch
Affiliation:
MRC Dunn Clinical Nutrition Centre, 100 Tennis Court Road, Cambridge CB2 lQL
K. Day
Affiliation:
MRC Dunn Clinical Nutrition Centre, 100 Tennis Court Road, Cambridge CB2 lQL
A. Cassidy
Affiliation:
MRC Dunn Clinical Nutrition Centre, 100 Tennis Court Road, Cambridge CB2 lQL
K. T. Khaw
Affiliation:
Clinical Gerontology Unit, F & G Block, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge CB2 2QQ
M. J. Sneyd
Affiliation:
Clinical Gerontology Unit, F & G Block, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge CB2 2QQ
T. J. A. Key
Affiliation:
Imperial Cancer Research Fund, Cancer Epidemiology Unit, Gibson Building, The Radclife Infirmary, Oxford OX2 6HE
L. Roe
Affiliation:
Imperial Cancer Research Fund, General Practice Research Group, Gibson Building, The Radclife Infirmary, Oxford OX2 6HE
N. E. Day
Affiliation:
MRC Biostatistics Unit, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge CB2 2SR
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

HTML view is not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Women (n 160) aged 50 to 65 years were asked to weigh their food for 4 d on four occasions over the period of 1 year, using the PETRA (Portable Electronic Tape Recorded Automatic) scales. Throughout the year, they were asked to complete seven other dietary assessment methods: a simple 24 h recall, a structured 24 h recall with portion size assessments using photographs, two food-frequency questionnaires, a 7 d estimated record or open-ended food diary, a structured food-frequency (menu) record, and a structured food-frequency (menu) record with portion sizes assessed using photographs. Comparisons between the average of the 16 d weighed records and the first presentation of each method indicated that food-frequency questionnaires were not appreciably better at placing individuals in the distribution of habitual diet than 24 h recalls, due partly to inaccuracies in the estimation of frequency of food consumption. With a 7 d estimated record or open-ended food diary, however, individual values of nutrients were most closely associated with those obtained from 16 d weighed records, and there were no significant differences in average food or nutrient intakes.

Type
Comparison of methods of dietary assessment
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1994

References

Bingham, S. A. (1987). The dietary assessment of individuals; methods, accuracy, new techniques and recommendations. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews 57A, 705742.Google Scholar
Bingham, S. A., McNeill, N. I. & Cummings, J. H. (1981). The diet of individuals: a study of a randomly chosen cross section of British adults in a Cambridgeshire village. British Journal of Nutrition 45, 2335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bingham, S. A., Pett, S. & Day, K. C. (1990). Non-starch polysaccharide intake of a representative sample of British adults. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics 3, 333–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bingham, S. A., Cassidy, A., Cole, T., Welch, A., Runswick, S. A., Black, A. E., Thurnham, D., Bates, C., Khaw, K. T. & Day, N. E. (1994). Validation of weighed records and other methods of dietary assessment using the 24 h urine nitrogen technique and other biological markers. British Journal of Nutrition (In the Press).Google Scholar
Bingham, S. A., Welch, A., Cassidy, A., Runswick, S., Gill, c. & Khaw, K. T. (1991). The use of 24 h urine nitrogen to detect bias in the reported habitual food intake of individuals assessed from weighed dietary records. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 50, 32A.Google Scholar
Bland, J. M. & Altman, D. G. (1986). Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet i, 307310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Block, G. (1982). A review of validations of dietary assessment methods. American Journal of Epidemiology 115, 492505.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Braddon, F. E. M., Wadsworth, M. E. J., Davies, J. M. C. & Cripps, H. A. (1988). Social and regional differences in food and alcohol consumption in Britain. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 42, 341349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callmer, E., Riboli, E., Saracci, R., Akesson, B. & Lindegarde, F. (1993). Dietary assessment methods evaluated in the Malmo study. Journal of Internal Medicine 233, 5357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawley, H. (1988). Food Portion Sizes. London: H.M. Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Edington, J., Thorogood, M., Geekie, M., Ball, M. & Mann, J. (1989). Assessment of nutritional intake using dietary records with estimated weights. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietefics 2, 407414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engle, A., Lynn, L. L., Koury, K. & Boyar, A. P. (1990). Reproducibility and comparability of a computerised, self administered food frequency questionnaire. Nutrition and Cancer 13, 281292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory, J., Foster, K., Tyler, H. & Wiseman, M. (1990). The Dietary and Nutritional Survey of British Adults. London: H.M. Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Holland, B., Unwin, I. D. & Buss, D. H. (1988). Cereals and Cereal Products, Third Supplement to McCance and Widdowson's Composition of Foods. London: H.M. Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Holland, B., Unwin, I. & Buss, D. H. (1989). Milk, Milk Products and Eggs. Fourth Supplement to McCance and Widdowson's The Composition of Foods. London: H.M. Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Mares-Perlman, J., Klein, B. E., Klein, R., Ritter, L., Fisher, M. R. & Freudenheim, J. L. (1993). A diet history questionnaire ranks nutrient intakes in middle aged and older men and women similarly to multiple food records. Journal of Nutrition 123, 489501.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Margetts, B. M., Cade, J. E. & Osmond, C. (1989). Comparison of food frequency questionnaire with a diet record. International Journal of Epidemiology 18, 868873.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Food Survey Committee (1982). Annual Report of Household Food Consumption and Expenditure: 1980. London: H.M. Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Nelson, M. (1991). Assessment of food consumption and nutrient intake: past intake. In Design Concepts in Nutritional Epidemiology, pp. 167191 [Margetts, B. M. and Nelson, M., editors]. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Paul, A. A. & Southgate, D. A. T. (1978). McCance and Widdowson's The Composition of Foods, 4th ed. London: H.M. Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Pietinen, P., Hartman, A. M., Haapa, E., Rasenen, L., Haapakovski, J., Plamgren, J., Albanes, D., Virtamo, J. & Huttunen, J. K. (1988). Reproducibility and validity of dietary assessment instruments. 1. A self administered food use questionnaire with a portion size booklet. American Journal of Epidemiology 128, 655666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rimm, E. B., Giovanucci, E. L., Stampfer, M. J., Colditz, G. A., Litin, L. B. & Willett, W. C. (1992). Reproducibility and validity of an expanded self administered semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire among male health professionals. American Journal of Epidemiology 135, 11161126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sempos, C. T. (1992). Some limitations of semiquantitative food frequency questionnaires. American Journal of Epidemiology 135, 11271133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiles, S. J., Nettleton, P. A., Black, A. E. & Paul, A. A. (1980). The nutrient consumption of some cooked dishes eaten in Britain: a supplementary consumption table. Journal of Human Nutrition 34, 189223.Google Scholar
Willett, W. C. (1990). Reproducibility and validity of food frequency questionnaires. In Nutritional Epidemiology, pp. 92126 [Willett, W. C., editor]. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Willett, W. C., Sampson, L., Stampfer, M., Rosner, B., Bain, C., Witschi, J., Hennekens, C. H. & Speizer, F. E. (1985). Reproducibility and validity of a semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire. American Journal of Epidemiology 122, 5165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woolf, B. C. (1954). Statistical aspects of dietary surveys. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 12, 8294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yarnell, J. W. G., Fehily, A. M., Milbank, J. E., Sweetnam, P. M. & Walker, C. L. (1983). A short dietary questionnaire for use in an epidemiological survey: comparison with weighed dietary records. Human Nutrition:Applied Nutrition 37A, 103112.Google Scholar
You have Access
502
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Comparison of dietary assessment methods in nutritional epidemiology: weighed records v. 24 h recalls, food-frequency questionnaires and estimated-diet records
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Comparison of dietary assessment methods in nutritional epidemiology: weighed records v. 24 h recalls, food-frequency questionnaires and estimated-diet records
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Comparison of dietary assessment methods in nutritional epidemiology: weighed records v. 24 h recalls, food-frequency questionnaires and estimated-diet records
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *