Skip to main content
×
Home

Food photographs: practical guidelines I. Design and analysis of studies to validate portion size estimates

  • Michael Nelson (a1) and Jóhanna Haraldsdóttir (a2)
    • 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.

      Food photographs: practical guidelines I. Design and analysis of studies to validate portion size estimates
      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.

      Food photographs: practical guidelines I. Design and analysis of studies to validate portion size estimates
      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.

      Food photographs: practical guidelines I. Design and analysis of studies to validate portion size estimates
      Available formats
      ×
Abstract
Copyright
Corresponding author
*Corresponding author: E-mail: michael.nelson@kcl.ac.uk
References
Hide All
1Young LR, Nestle M. Portion sizes in dietary assessment: issues and policy implications. Nutr. Rev. 1995; 53: 149–58.
2Cypel YS, Guenther PM, Petot GJ. Validity of portion-size measurement aids: A review. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 1997; 97: 289–92.
3Margetts BM, Nelson M. Design Concepts in Nutritional Epidemiology, second edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4Cole TJ. Sampling, study size and power. In: Margetts BM, Nelson M, eds. Design Concepts in Nutritional Epidemiology, second edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
5Nelson M. The validation of dietary assessment. In: Margetts BM, Nelson M. Design Concepts in Nutritional Epidemiology, second edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
6Bolland JE, Yuhas HA, Bolland TW. Estimation of food portion sizes: effectiveness of training. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 1988; 88: 817–21.
7Bolland JE, Ward JY, Bolland TW. Improved accuracy of estimating food quantities up to 4 weeks after training. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 1990; 90: 1402–4.
8Howat PM, Mohan R, Champagne C, Monlezun C, Wozniak P, Bray GA. Validity and reliability of reported dietary intake data. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 1994; 94: 169–73.
9Bingham SA, Gill C, Welch A, Day K, Cassidy A, Khaw KT, Sneyd MJ, Key TJA, Roe L, Day NE. Comparison of dietary assessment methods in nutritional epidemiology: weighed records v. 24 h recalls, food-frequency questionnaires and estimated-diet records. Br. J. Nutr. 1994; 2: 619–43.
10Bingham SA, Cassidy A, Cole T, Welch A, Runswick S, Black AE,Thurnham D, Bates CE, Cassidy A, Khaw KT, Day NE. Validation of weighed records and other methods of dietary assessment using the 24 h urine technique and other biological markers. Br. J. Nutr. 1995; 73: 531–50.
11Smith SA, Campbell DR, Elmer PJ, Martini MC, Slavin JL, Potter JD. The University of Minnesota Cancer Prevention Research Unit vegetable and fruit classification scheme (United States). Cancer Causes and Control 1995; 6: 292302.
12Crawford FG, Mayer J, Santella RM, Cooper TB, Ottman R, Tsai W-Y, Simon-Cereijido G, Wang M, Tang D, Perera FP. Biomarkers of environmental tobacco smoke in preschool children and their mothers. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 1994; 86: 1398–402.
13Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1: 307–10.
14Nelson M, Atkinson M, Darbyshire S. Food photography 2. Use of food photographs for estimating portion size and the nutrient content of meals. Br. J. Nutr. 1996; 76: 3149.
15Haraldsdóttir J, Tjønneland A, Overvad K. Validity of individual portion size estimates in a food frequency questionnaire. Int. J. Epidemiol. 1994; 23: 787–96.
16Kirkcaldy-Hargreaves M, Lynch GW, Santor C. Assessment of the validity of four food models. J. Can. Diet. Assoc.. 1980; 41: 102–10.
17Kuehnemann T, Stanek K, Eskridge K, Angle C. Comparability of four methods for estimating portion size during a food frequency interview with caregivers of young children. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 1994; 94: 548–50.
18Nelson M, Atkinson M. Darbyshire S. Food photography 1: The perception of food portion size from photographs. Br. J. Nutr. 1994; 72: 649–63.
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? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 158 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 157 *
Loading metrics...

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