Skip to main content Accessibility help

Dietary assessment toolkits: an overview

  • Maria Carlota Dao (a1), Amy F Subar (a2), Marisol Warthon-Medina (a3), Janet E Cade (a3), Tracy Burrows (a4), Rebecca K Golley (a5), Nita G Forouhi (a6), Matthew Pearce (a6) and Bridget A Holmes (a7)...



A wide variety of methods are available to assess dietary intake, each one with different strengths and weaknesses. Researchers face multiple challenges when diet and nutrition need to be accurately assessed, particularly in the selection of the most appropriate dietary assessment method for their study. The goal of the current collaborative work is to present a collection of available resources for dietary assessment implementation.


As a follow-up to the 9th International Conference on Diet and Physical Activity Methods held in 2015, developers of dietary assessment toolkits agreed to collaborate in the preparation of the present paper, which provides an overview of each toolkit. The toolkits presented include: the Diet, Anthropometry and Physical Activity Measurement Toolkit (DAPA; UK); the National Cancer Institute’s (NCI) Dietary Assessment Primer (USA); the Nutritools website (UK); the Australasian Child and Adolescent Obesity Research Network (ACAORN) method selector (Australia); and the Danone Dietary Assessment Toolkit (DanoneDAT; France). An at-a-glance summary of features and comparison of the toolkits is provided.


The present review contains general background on dietary assessment, along with a summary of each of the included toolkits, a feature comparison table and direct links to each toolkit, all of which are freely available online.


This overview of dietary assessment toolkits provides comprehensive information to aid users in the selection and implementation of the most appropriate dietary assessment method, or combination of methods, with the goal of collecting the highest-quality dietary data possible.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure 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 or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ 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.

      Dietary assessment toolkits: an overview
      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.

      Dietary assessment toolkits: an overview
      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.

      Dietary assessment toolkits: an overview
      Available formats


Corresponding author

*Corresponding author: Email


Hide All

Current affiliation: Jean Mayer USDA Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging at Tufts University, Boston, MA, USA.

On behalf of the DIET@NET consortium.


On behalf of the Food and Nutrition Stream, ACAORN.



Hide All
1. Subar, AF, Freedman, LS, Tooze, JA et al. (2015) Addressing current criticism regarding the value of self-report dietary data. J Nutr 145, 26392645.
2. Bates, CJ, Bogin, B & Holmes, BA (2017) Nutritional assessment methods. In Human Nutrition, 13th ed., pp. 613646 [C Geissler and H Powers, editors]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3. Gemming, L, Utter, J & Ni Mhurchu, C (2015) Image-assisted dietary assessment: a systematic review of the evidence. J Acad Nutr Diet 115, 6477.
4. Hassannejad, H, Matrella, G, Ciampolini, P et al. (2017) Automatic diet monitoring: a review of computer vision and wearable sensor-based methods. Int J Food Sci Nutr 68, 656670.
5. Amoutzopoulos, B, Steer, T, Roberts, C et al. (2018) Traditional methods v. new technologies – dilemmas for dietary assessment in large-scale nutrition surveys and studies: a report following an international panel discussion at the 9th International Conference on Diet and Activity Methods (ICDAM9), Brisbane, 3 September 2015. J Nutr Sci 7, e11.
6. Day, N, McKeown, N, Wong, M et al. (2001) Epidemiological assessment of diet: a comparison of a 7-day diary with a food frequency questionnaire using urinary markers of nitrogen, potassium and sodium. Int J Epidemiol 30, 309317.
7. Cade, JE, Burley, VJ, Greenwood, DC et al. (2004) The UK Women’s Cohort Study: comparison of vegetarians, fish-eaters and meat-eaters. Public Health Nutr 7, 871878.
8. Dalmeijer, GW, Struijk, EA, van der Schouw, YT et al. (2013) Dairy intake and coronary heart disease or stroke – a population-based cohort study. Int J Cardiol 167, 925929.
9. Rizzo, NS, Jaceldo-Siegl, K, Sabate, J et al. (2013) Nutrient profiles of vegetarian and nonvegetarian dietary patterns. J Acad Nutr Diet 113, 16101619.
10. Moskal, A, Pisa, PT, Ferrari, P et al. (2014) Nutrient patterns and their food sources in an international study setting: report from the EPIC study. PLoS One 9, e98647.
11. Cade, J, Thompson, R, Burley, V et al. (2002) Development, validation and utilisation of food-frequency questionnaires – a review. Public Health Nutr 5, 567587.
12. Robertson, C, Conway, R, Dennis, B et al. (2005) Attainment of precision in implementation of 24 h dietary recalls: INTERMAP UK. Br J Nutr 94, 588594.
13. Subar, AF, Kirkpatrick, SI, Mittl, B et al. (2012) The Automated Self-Administered 24-hour dietary recall (ASA24): a resource for researchers, clinicians, and educators from the National Cancer Institute. J Acad Nutr Diet 112, 11341137.
14. Castetbon, K, Vernay, M, Malon, A et al. (2009) Dietary intake, physical activity and nutritional status in adults: the French nutrition and health survey (ENNS, 2006–2007). Br J Nutr 102, 733743.
15. Rehm, CD, Peñalvo, JL, Afshin, A et al. (2016) Dietary intake among US adults, 1999–2012. JAMA 315, 25422553.
16. Albar, SA, Alwan, NA, Evans, CEL et al. (2016) Agreement between an online dietary assessment tool (myfood24) and an interviewer-administered 24-h dietary recall in British adolescents aged 11–18 years. Br J Nutr 115, 16781686.
17. Carter, MC, Albar, SA, Morris, MA et al. (2015) Development of a UK online 24-h dietary assessment tool: myfood24. Nutrients 7, 40164032.
18. Raper, N, Perloff, B, Ingwersen, L et al. (2004) An overview of USDA’s dietary intake data system. J Food Compost Anal 17, 545555.
19. Moshfegh, A, Goldman, J, Lacomb, R et al. (2001) Research results using the new USDA Automated Multiple-Pass Method. FASEB J 15, A278 (abstr).
20. Prentice, RL, Caan, B, Chlebowski, RT et al. (2006) Low-fat dietary pattern and risk of invasive breast cancer: the Women’s Health Initiative Randomized Controlled Dietary Modification Trial. JAMA 295, 629642.
21. Cantwell, MM, Millen, AE, Carroll, R et al. (2006) A debriefing session with a nutritionist can improve dietary assessment using food diaries. J Nutr 136, 440445.
22. Verreijen, AM, Verlaan, S, Engberink, MF et al. (2015) A high whey protein-, leucine-, and vitamin D-enriched supplement preserves muscle mass during intentional weight loss in obese older adults: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Am J Clin Nutr 101, 279286.
23. Westerterp, KR & Goris, AHC (2002) Validity of the assessment of dietary intake: problems of misreporting. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 5, 489493.
24. Poslusna, K, Ruprich, J, de Vries, JHM 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.
25. Macdiarmid, JI & Blundell, JE (1997) Dietary under-reporting: what people say about recording their food intake. Eur J Clin Nutr 51, 199200.
26. Johansson, L, Solvoll, K, Bjorneboe, GE et al. (1998) Under- and overreporting of energy intake related to weight status and lifestyle in a nationwide sample. Am J Clin Nutr 68, 266274.
27. Bell, W, Colaiezzi, BA, Prata, CS et al. (2017) Scaling up dietary data for decision-making in low-income countries: new technological frontiers. Adv Nutr 8, 916932.
28. Coates, JC, Colaiezzi, BA, Bell, W et al. (2017) Overcoming dietary assessment challenges in low-income countries: technological solutions proposed by the International Dietary Data Expansion (INDDEX) Project. Nutrients 9, E289.
29. Holmes, B, Dao, M & Verger, E (2015) Three mini toolkits for collecting and analysing dietary data in clinical studies. Poster presented at 9th International Conference on Diet and Activity Methods (ICDAM9), Brisbane, Australia, 1–3 September 2015.
30. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2018) Dietary Assessment: A Resource Guide to Method Selection and Application in Low Resource Settings. Rome. FAO.
31. Lachat, C, Hawwash, D, Ocké, MC et al. (2016) Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology – Nutritional Epidemiology (STROBE-nut): an extension of the STROBE statement. PLoS Med 13, e1002036.
32. National Cancer Institute (2017) Dietary Assessment Primer. (accessed October 2017).
33. Thompson, FE, Kirkpatrick, SI, Subar, AF et al. (2015) The National Cancer Institute’s Dietary Assessment Primer: a resource for diet research. J Acad Nutr Diet 115, 19861995.
34. Carroll, RJ, Midthune, D, Subar, AF et al. (2012) Taking advantage of the strengths of 2 different dietary assessment instruments to improve intake estimates for nutritional epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol 175, 340347.
35. Warthon-Medina, M, Hooson, J, Hancock, N et al. (2017) Development of Nutritools, an interactive dietary assessment tools website, for use in health research. Lancet 390, S94.
36. Cade, JE, Warthon-Medina, M, Albar, S et al. (2017) DIET@NET: Best Practice Guidelines for dietary assessment in health research. BMC Med 15, 202.
37. Hooson, J, Hancock, N, Greenwood, DC et al. (2016) A systematic review of systematic reviews of validated dietary assessment tools. Proc Nutr Soc 75, issue OCE3, E239.
38. Finglas, P, Roe, M, Pinchen, H et al. (2014) McCance and Widdowson’s The Composition of Foods: Seventh Summary Edition. Cambridge: Royal Society of Chemistry.
39. NatCen Social Research (2018) Discover | National Diet and Nutrition Survey Years 1–6, 2008/09–2013/14. (accessed February 2018).
40. Hooson, J, Warthon-Medina, M, Hancock, N et al. (2017) A new approach for developing food frequency questionnaires: the Food Questionnaire Creator. Proc Nutr Soc 76, issue OCE4, E164.
41. Burrows, T, Golley, RK, Khambalia, A et al. (2012) The quality of dietary intake methodology and reporting in child and adolescent obesity intervention trials: a systematic review. Obes Rev 13, 11251138.
42. Magarey, A, Watson, J, Golley, RK et al. (2011) Assessing dietary intake in children and adolescents: Considerations and recommendations for obesity research. Int J Pediatr Obes 6, 211.
43. Golley, RK, McNaughton, SA, Collins, CE et al. (2014) Australasian nutrition research for prevention and management of child obesity: innovation and progress in the last decade. Pediatr Obes 9, e132e136.
44. Schofield, WN (1985) Predicting basal metabolic rate, new standards and review of previous work. Hum Nutr Clin Nutr 39, Suppl. 1, 541.
45. Cade, J, Warthon-Medina, M, Hooson, J et al. (2017) P63 | DIET@NET: development of the Nutritools website for dietary assessment. J Epidemiol Community Health 71, Suppl. 1, A79 (abstr).


Related content

Powered by UNSILO

Dietary assessment toolkits: an overview

  • Maria Carlota Dao (a1), Amy F Subar (a2), Marisol Warthon-Medina (a3), Janet E Cade (a3), Tracy Burrows (a4), Rebecca K Golley (a5), Nita G Forouhi (a6), Matthew Pearce (a6) and Bridget A Holmes (a7)...


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

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

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.