Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

Assessing the relative validity of the Scottish Collaborative Group FFQ for measuring dietary intake in adults

  • Jenna L Hollis (a1), Leone CA Craig (a1), Stephen Whybrow (a1), Heather Clark (a2), Janet AM Kyle (a2) and Geraldine McNeill (a2)...
Abstract
Abstract Objective

To assess the relative validity of the latest version of the Scottish Collaborative Group (SCG) FFQ (version 6.6) in adults living in Scotland.

Design

A cross-sectional validation study. Participants completed the self-administered, 169-item SCG FFQ followed by a 7 d, non-weighed food diary. Energy and energy-adjusted macronutrients and micronutrients were examined for relative validity through Spearman’s correlation, the percentage of classification into thirds of intake, Cohen’s weighted kappa (κ w) and Bland–Altman analysis.

Setting

General population living in Scotland.

Subjects

Ninety-six adults aged 18–65 years.

Results

Spearman’s correlation coefficients ranged from 0·21 (retinol) to 0·71 (Mg). A median of 52 % of adults were correctly classified into thirds of intake (range: 42 % (PUFA, MUFA and Fe) to 64 % (percentage energy from carbohydrates)) and 8 % were grossly misclassified into opposite thirds of intake (range: 3 % (carbohydrates, percentage energy from carbohydrates) to 19 % (thiamin)). Values of κ w ranged between 0·20 (PUFA, β-carotene) to 0·55 (percentage energy from carbohydrates). In the Bland–Altman analysis, the smallest limits of agreement, when expressed as a percentage of the mean intake from the FFQ and food diary, were seen for the main macronutrients carbohydrates, fat and protein.

Conclusions

As in the previous validation study more than 10 years ago, the FFQ gave higher estimates of energy and most nutrients than the food diary, but after adjustment for energy intake the FFQ could be used in place of non-weighed food diaries for most macronutrients and many micronutrients in large-scale epidemiological studies.

  • View HTML
    • 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.

      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.

      Assessing the relative validity of the Scottish Collaborative Group FFQ for measuring dietary intake in adults
      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 Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Assessing the relative validity of the Scottish Collaborative Group FFQ for measuring dietary intake in adults
      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 Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Assessing the relative validity of the Scottish Collaborative Group FFQ for measuring dietary intake in adults
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
* Corresponding author: Email l.craig@abdn.ac.uk
References
Hide All
1. WillettWC (2012) Nutritional Epidemiology, 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. WillettWC (1994) Future directions in the development of food-frequency questionnaires. Am J Clin Nutr 59, 1 Suppl., 171S174S.
3. SmithWCS, CrombieIC, TavendaleR et al. (1987) The Scottish Heart Health Survey – objectives and development of methods. Health Bull 45, 211217.
4. AllanKM, PrabhuN, CraigLC et al. (2015) Maternal vitamin D and E intakes during pregnancy are associated with asthma in children. Eur Respir J 45, 10271036.
5. TheodoratouE, FarringtonSM, TenesaA et al. (2014) Associations between dietary and lifestyle risk factors and colorectal cancer in the Scottish population. Eur J Cancer Prev 23, 817.
6. MassonLF, McNeillG, TomanyJO et al. (2003) Statistical approaches for assessing the relative validity of a food-frequency questionnaire: use of correlation coefficients and the kappa statistic. Public Health Nutr 6, 313321.
7. SubarAF, ThompsonFE, KipnisV et al. (2001) Comparative validation of the Block, Willett, and National Cancer Institute food frequency questionnaires: the Eating at America’s Table Study. Am J Epidemiol 154, 10891099.
8. The Scottish Government (2010) The Scottish Health Survey 2010. vol. 2: Technical Report . Edinburgh: The Scottish Government.
9. HenryCJ (2005) Basal metabolic rate studies in humans: measurement and development of new equations. Public Health Nutr 8, 11331152.
10. Scottish Collaborative Group (n.d.) Scottish Collaborative Group Food Frequency Questionnaire. http://www.foodfrequency.org/ (accessed May 2015).
11. Food Standards Agency (2002) McCance and Widdowson’s The Composition of Foods Integrated Dataset, 6th ed. Cambridge: Royal Society of Chemistry.
12. NelsonM, AtkinsonM & MeyerJ (2002) A Photographic Atlas of Food Portion Sizes. London: Food Standards Agency.
13. PoslusnaK, RuprichJ, de VriesJH et al. (2009) Misreporting of energy and micronutrient intake estimated by food records and 24 hour recalls, control and adjustment methods in practice. Br J Nutr 101, Suppl. 2, S73S85.
14. BlandJM & AltmanDG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1, 307310.
15. BoucherB, CotterchioM, KreigerN et al. (2006) Validity and reliability of the Block98 food-frequency questionnaire in a sample of Canadian women. Public Health Nutr 9, 8493.
16. LassaleC, GuilbertC, KeoghJ et al. (2009) Estimating food intakes in Australia: validation of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) food frequency questionnaire against weighed dietary intakes. J Hum Nutr Diet 22, 559566.
17. Henriquez-SanchezP, Sanchez-VillegasA, Doreste-AlonsoJ et al. (2009) Dietary assessment methods for micronutrient intake: a systematic review on vitamins. Br J Nutr 102, Suppl. 1, S10S37.
18. van de MortelTF (2008) Faking it: social desirability response bias in self-report research. Aust J Adv Nurs 25, 40.
19. WinklerJT (2005) The fundamental flaw in obesity research. Obes Rev 6, 199202.
20. AltmanDG (1991) Practical Statistics for Medical Research. London: Chapman and Hall.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Public Health Nutrition
  • ISSN: 1368-9800
  • EISSN: 1475-2727
  • URL: /core/journals/public-health-nutrition
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary Materials

Hollis supplementary material
Tables S1-S5 and Figures S1 and S2

 Word (381 KB)
381 KB

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 17
Total number of PDF views: 132 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 431 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 13th September 2016 - 21st October 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.