Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Calibration of the dietary questionnaire for the Canadian Study of Diet, Lifestyle and Health cohort

  • Meera G Jain (a1), Thomas E Rohan (a2), Colin L Soskolne (a3) and Nancy Kreiger (a4)

For proper interpretation of results from epidemiological studies that use food-frequency questionnaires (FFQs), it is necessary to know the relationship between reported intakes from the FFQ and true usual intake. In this paper, we report a calibration study conducted to investigate the performance of the FFQ used in a cohort study, the Canadian Study of Diet, Lifestyle and Health.


Over a 1-year period, 151 men and 159 women completed a full set of questionnaires including a self-administered baseline FFQ, three 24-hour diet recalls administered by telephone, and a second FFQ self-administered subsequently. The association between the nutrient estimates derived from the FFQs and the diet recalls was evaluated by calculating deattenuated Pearson's correlation coefficients.


The FFQs estimated mean daily nutrient intakes higher than the diet recalls. When the log-transformed and energy-adjusted nutrient intakes from the average of three 24-hour recalls were compared against the baseline FFQ, the following deattenuated correlations were obtained in men and women, respectively: total energy 0.44 and 0.32, total fat 0.64 and 0.68, saturated fat 0.68 and 0.70, dietary fibre 0.65 and 0.44, vitamin E 0.32 and 0.37, vitamin C 0.40 and 0.37, β-carotene 0.34 and 0.29, alcohol 0.74 and 0.67, caffeine 0.81 and 0.76, with a median correlation of 0.49 and 0.53. Correlations between the second FFQ and diet recalls were similar. The correlations between the two FFQs as a test of reliability had a median value 0.64 for men and 0.63 for women for selected nutrients.


The study suggests that the FFQ method gives acceptable levels of nutrients or food component estimates, as assessed by this calibration study against diet recalls, when limited to energy-adjusted and deattenuated values.

Corresponding author
*Corresponding author: Email
Hide All
1Stram DO, Hankin JH, Wilkens LR, et al. Calibration of the dietary questionnaire for a multiethnic cohort in Hawaii and Los Angeles. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2000; 151: 358–70.
2Carroll RJ, Pee D, Freedman LS, et al. Statistical design of calibration studies. Am. J Clin. Nutr. 1997; 65(Suppl.): 1187S–9S.
3. Willett W. Nutritional Epidemiology. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.
4Stram DO, Longnecker MP, Shames L, et al. Cost effective design of a diet validation study. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1995; 142: 353–62.
5Kaaks R, Riboli E. Validation and calibration of dietary intake measurements in the EPIC project: methodological considerations. Int. J. Epidemiol. 1997; 26(Suppl. 1): S15–25.
6Jain M, Harrison L, Howe GR, et al. Evaluation of a selfadministered dietary questionnaire for use in a cohort study. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 1982; 36: 931–5.
7Miller AB, Howe GR, Wall C. The national study of breast cancer screening. Clin. Invest. Med. 1981; 4: 227–58.
8Jain M, Howe GR, Rohan T. Dietary assessment in epidemiology: comparison of a food frequency and a diet history questionnaire with 7-day food records. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1996; 143: 953–60.
9Health Canada. Canadian Nutrient File. Ottawa: Nutrition Research Division, Health Canada, 1997.
10Mangels AR, Holden JM, Beecher GR, et al. The carotenoid content of fruits and vegetables: an evaluation of analytic data. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 1993; 93: 284–96.
11National Cancer Institute. NFCS Classification System. National Food Consumption Survey. US Department of Agriculture. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute, 1993.
12Willett WC, Stampfer MJ. Total energy intake: implications for epidemiologic analyses. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1986; 124: 1727.
13Rosner B, Willett WC. Interval estimates for correlation coefficients corrected for within-person variation: implications for study design and hypothesis testing. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1988; 127: 377–86.
14Hu FB, Rimm E, Smith-Warner SA, et al. Reproducibility and validity of dietary patterns associated with a food-frequency questionnaire. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 1999; 69: 243–9.
15Statistics Canada. Personal health practices: smoking, drinking, physical activity and weight. Health Reports 1999; 11: 83–90.
16Bright-See E, Catlin G, Godin G. Assessment of the relative validity of the Ontario Health Survey Food Frequency Questionnaire. J. Can. Diet. Assoc. 1994; 55: 33–8.
17Willett WC, Sampson L, Stampfer MJ, et al. Reproducibility and validity of a semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1985; 122(1): 5165.
18Kroke A, Klipstein-Grobusch K, Voss S, et al. Validation of a self-administered food-frequency questionnaire administered in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) Study: comparison of energy, protein, and macronutrient intakes estimated with the doubly labeled water, urinary nitrogen, and repeated 24-h dietary recall methods. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 1999; 70(4): 439–47.
19Kaaks R, Slamani N, Riboli E. Pilot phase studies on the accuracy of dietary intake measurements in the EPIC project: overall evaluation of results. Int. J. Epidemiol. 1997; 26: S26–36.
20Black AE. Physical activity levels from a meta-analysis of doubly labeled water studies for validating energy intake as measured by dietary assessment. Nutr. Rev. 1996; 54: 170–4.
21Martínez ME, Marshall JR, Graver E, et al. Reliability and validity of a self-administered food frequency questionnaire in a chemoprevention trial of adenoma recurrence. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 1999; 8: 941–6.
22Subar AF, Thompson FE, Kipnis V, et al. Comparative validation of the Block, Willett, and National Cancer Institute food frequency questionnaires: the Eating at America's Table Study. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2001; 154(12): 1089–99.
23Rimm EB, Giovannucci EL, Stampfer MJ, et al. Reproducibility and validity of an expanded self-administered semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire among male health professionals. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1992; 135: 1114–26.
24Hankin JH, Wilkens LR, Kolonel LN, et al. Validation of a quantitative diet history method in Hawaii. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1991; 133: 616–28.
25Lee J. Use of regression adjustment for ascertaining nutrient intakes. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 1981; 78: 245–9.
26Thomas D, Stram D, Dwyer J. Exposure measurement error: influence on exposure–disease relationships and methods of correction. Ann. Public Health 1993; 14: 6993.
27Black AE, Prentice AM, Goldberg G, et al. Measurements of total energy expenditure provide insights into the validity of dietary measurements of energy intake. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 1993; 93: 572–9.
28Schaefer EJ, Augustin JL, Schaefer MM, et al. Lack of efficacy of a food-frequency questionnaire in assessing dietary macronutrient intakes in participants consuming diets of known composition. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2000; 71: 746–51.
29Kaaks R, Riboli E, van Staveren W. Calibration of dietary intake measurements in prospective cohort studies. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1995; 142(5): 548–56.
30Rosner B, Willett W, Spiegelman D. Correction of logistic regression relative risk estimates and confidence intervals for systematic within-person measurement error. Stat. Med. 1989; 8: 1051–69.
31Jain M, McLaughlin J. Validity of nutrient estimates by food frequency questionnaires based either on exact frequencies or categories. Ann. Epidemiol. 2000; 10: 354–60.
32Kipnis V, Carroll RJ, Freedman LS, et al. Implications of a new dietary measurement error model for estimation of relative risk: application to four calibration studies. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2000; 152(5): 494–6.
33Kipnis V, Midthune D, Freedman LS, et al. Empirical evidence of correlated biases in dietary assessment instruments and its implications. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2001; 153(4): 394403.
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? *



Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 13 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 122 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 23rd October 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.