Skip to main content
×
Home

Strength of the relationships between three self-reported dietary intake instruments and serum carotenoids: the Observing Energy and Protein Nutrition (OPEN) Study

  • Stephanie M George (a1), Frances E Thompson (a1), Douglas Midthune (a2), Amy F Subar (a1), David Berrigan (a1), Arthur Schatzkin (a3) and Nancy Potischman (a1)...
Abstract
AbstractObjective

To assess the strength of the relationships between serum carotenoids and three self-reported dietary intake instruments often used to characterize carotenoid intake in studies of diet and disease.

Design

Participants completed a Diet History Questionnaire (DHQ), two 24 h dietary recalls (24HR), a fruit and vegetable screener and a fasting blood draw. We derived dietary intake estimates of α-carotene, β-carotene, cryptoxanthin, lutein, zeaxanthin and lycopene from each diet instrument and calculated sex-specific multivariate correlations between dietary intake estimates and their corresponding serum values.

Setting

Montgomery County, Maryland, USA.

Subjects

Four hundred and seventy women and men aged 40–69 years in the National Cancer Institute's Observing Protein and Energy Nutrition (OPEN) Study.

Results

Serum carotenoids correlated more strongly with the DHQ (r = 0·34–0·54 for women; r = 0·38–0·56 for men) than with the average of two recalls (r = 0·26–0·47 for women; r = 0·26–0·40 for men) with the exception of zeaxanthin, for which the correlations using recalls were higher. With adjustment for within-person variation, correlations between serum carotenoids and recalls were greatly improved (r = 0·38–0·83 for women; r = 0·42–0·74 for men). In most cases, correlations between serum carotenoids and the fruit and vegetable screener resembled serum–DHQ correlations.

Conclusions

Evidence from the study provides support for the use of the DHQ, a fruit and vegetable screener and deattenuated recalls for estimating carotenoid status in studies without serum measures, and draws attention to the importance of adjusting for intra-individual variability when using recalls to estimate carotenoid values.

    • 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.

      Strength of the relationships between three self-reported dietary intake instruments and serum carotenoids: the Observing Energy and Protein Nutrition (OPEN) Study
      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.

      Strength of the relationships between three self-reported dietary intake instruments and serum carotenoids: the Observing Energy and Protein Nutrition (OPEN) Study
      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.

      Strength of the relationships between three self-reported dietary intake instruments and serum carotenoids: the Observing Energy and Protein Nutrition (OPEN) Study
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
*Corresponding author: Email stephanie.george@nih.gov
References
Hide All
1.World Cancer Research Fund & American Institute for Cancer Research (2007) Food, Nutrition, Physical Activity, and the Prevention of Cancer: A Global Perspective. Washington, DC: AICR.
2.Mayne ST (2003) Antioxidant nutrients and chronic disease: use of biomarkers of exposure and oxidative stress status in epidemiologic research. J Nutr 133, Suppl. 3, 933S940S.
3.Bingham S, Luben R, Welch A et al. (2008) Associations between dietary methods and biomarkers, and between fruits and vegetables and risk of ischaemic heart disease, in the EPIC Norfolk Cohort Study. Int J Epidemiol 37, 978987.
4.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.
5.Kipnis V, Subar AF, Midthune D et al. (2003) Structure of dietary measurement error: results of the OPEN biomarker study. Am J Epidemiol 158, 1421.
6.Schatzkin A, Kipnis V, Carroll RJ et al. (2003) A comparison of a food frequency questionnaire with a 24-hour recall for use in an epidemiological cohort study: results from the biomarker-based Observing Protein and Energy Nutrition (OPEN) study. Int J Epidemiol 32, 10541062.
7.Rock CL (1997) Carotenoids: biology and treatment. Pharmacol Ther 75, 185197.
8.Schatzkin A & Kipnis V (2004) Could exposure assessment problems give us wrong answers to nutrition and cancer questions? J Natl Cancer Inst 96, 15641565.
9.Subar AF, Kipnis V, Troiano RP et al. (2003) Using intake biomarkers to evaluate the extent of dietary misreporting in a large sample of adults: the OPEN study. Am J Epidemiol 158, 113.
10.National Institutes of Health (2010) Diet History Questionnaire (DHQ), version 1.0. http://riskfactor.cancer.gov/DHQ (accessed July 2010).
11.US Department of Agriculture (1992) The Food Guide Pyramid. Beltsville, MD: USDA.
12.Nöthlings U, Murphy SP, Sharma S et al. (2006) A comparison of two methods of measuring food group intake: grams vs servings. J Am Diet Assoc 106, 737739.
13.Dixon LB, Zimmerman TP, Kahle LL et al. (2003) Adding carotenoids to the NCI Diet History Questionnaire Database. J Food Compost Anal 16, 269280.
14.Subar AF, Midthune D, Kulldorff M et al. (2000) Evaluation of alternative approaches to assign nutrient values to food groups in food frequency questionnaires. Am J Epidemiol 152, 279286.
15.Moshfegh A, Raper N, Ingwersen L et al. (2001) An improved approach to 24-hour dietary recall methodology. Ann Nutr Metab 45, 56.
16.Tippett K & Cypel Y (1997) Design and Operation: The Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals and the Diet and Health Knowledge Survey, 1994–96. Washington, DC: Agricultural Research Service, USDA.
17.Thompson FE, Midthune D, Subar AF et al. (2004) Performance of a short tool to assess dietary intakes of fruits and vegetables, percentage energy from fat and fibre. Public Health Nutr 7, 10971105.
18.Scholler D (1992) Isotope dilution methods. In Obesity, pp. 8088 [P Borniorp and B Brodoff, editors]. Philadelphia, PA: Lipincott Company.
19.Racette SB, Schoeller DA, Luke AH et al. (1994) Relative dilution spaces of 2H- and 18O-labeled water in humans. Am J Physiol 267, E585E590.
20.Briefel R, Sempos C, McDowell M et al. (1997) Dietary methods research in the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey: underreporting of energy intake. Am J Clin Nutr 65, 4 Suppl., 1203S1209S.
21.de Vries J, Zock P, Mensink R et al. (1994) Underestimation of energy intake by 3-d records compared with energy intake to maintain body weight in 269 nonobese adults. Am J Clin Nutr 60, 855860.
22.Hirvonen T, Mannisto S, Roos E et al. (1997) Increasing prevalence of underreporting does not necessarily distort dietary surveys. Eur J Clin Nutr 51, 297301.
23.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.
24.Johnson R, Goran M & Poehlman E (1994) Correlates of over- and underreporting of energy intake in healthy older men and women. Am J Clin Nutr 59, 12861290.
25.Krebs-Smith SM, Graubard BI, Kahle LL et al. (2000) Low energy reporters vs others: a comparison of reported food intakes. Eur J Clin Nutr 54, 281287.
26.Price GM, Paul AA, Cole TJ et al. (1997) Characteristics of the low-energy reporters in a longitudinal national dietary survey. Br J Nutr 77, 833851.
27.Beaton G, Milner J, McGuire V et al. (1983) Source of variance in 24-hour dietary recall data: implications for nutrition study design and interpretation. Carbohydrate sources, vitamins, and minerals. Am J Clin Nutr 37, 986995.
28.National Cancer Institute's Applied Research Program (2005) Diet*Calc Analysis Program, Version 1.4.3.
29.Colon-Ramos U, Thompson FE, Yaroch AL et al. (2009) Differences in fruit and vegetable intake among Hispanic subgroups in California: results from the 2005 California Health Interview Survey. J Am Diet Assoc 109, 18781885.
30.Thompson FE, Midthune D, Subar AF et al. (2005) Dietary intake estimates in the National Health Interview Survey, 2000: methodology, results, and interpretation. J Am Diet Assoc 105, 352363.
31.Food and Nutrition Board, Institute of Medicine (2000) Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin C, Vitamin E. Selenium, and Carotenoids. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
32.Dixon LB, Subar AF, Wideroff L et al. (2006) Carotenoid and tocopherol estimates from the NCI diet history questionnaire are valid compared with multiple recalls and serum biomarkers. J Nutr 136, 30543061.
33.Natarajan L, Flatt SW, Sun X et al. (2006) Validity and systematic error in measuring carotenoid consumption with dietary self-report instruments. Am J Epidemiol 163, 770778.
34.EPIC Group of Spain, European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (1997) Relative validity and reproducibility of a diet history questionnaire in Spain. III. Biochemical markers. Int J Epidemiol 26, Suppl. 1, S110S117.
35.Kabagambe EK, Baylin A, Allan DA et al. (2001) Application of the method of triads to evaluate the performance of food frequency questionnaires and biomarkers as indicators of long-term dietary intake. Am J Epidemiol 154, 11261135.
36.Ocke MC & Kaaks RJ (1997) Biochemical markers as additional measurements in dietary validity studies: application of the method of triads with examples from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. Am J Clin Nutr 65, 4 Suppl., 1240S1245S.
37.Resnicow K, Odom E, Wang T et al. (2000) Validation of three food frequency questionnaires and 24-hour recalls with serum carotenoid levels in a sample of African-American adults. Am J Epidemiol 152, 10721080.
38.Shai I, Rosner BA, Shahar DR et al. (2005) Dietary evaluation and attenuation of relative risk: multiple comparisons between blood and urinary biomarkers, food frequency, and 24-hour recall questionnaires: the DEARR study. J Nutr 135, 573579.
39.Tangney CC, Bienias JL, Evans DA et al. (2004) Reasonable estimates of serum vitamin E, vitamin C, and β-cryptoxanthin are obtained with a food frequency questionnaire in older black and white adults. J Nutr 134, 927934.
40.Ferrari P, Al-Delaimy WK, Slimani N et al. (2005) An approach to estimate between- and within-group correlation coefficients in multicenter studies: plasma carotenoids as biomarkers of intake of fruits and vegetables. Am J Epidemiol 162, 591598.
41.Kaaks R, Ferrari P, Ciampi A et al. (2002) Uses and limitations of statistical accounting for random error correlations, in the validation of dietary questionnaire assessments. Public Health Nutr 5, 969976.
42.Rosner B, Michels KB, Chen Y-H et al. (2008) Measurement error correction for nutritional exposures with correlated measurement error: use of the method of triads in a longitudinal setting. Stat Med 27, 34663489.
43.Freedman L, Kipnis V, Schatzkin A et al. (2010) Can we use biomarkers in combination with self-reports to strengthen the analysis of nutritional epidemiologic studies? Epidemiol Perspect Innovat 7, 2.
44.National Cancer Institute (1999) Multifactorial Screener. http://appliedresearch.cancer.gov/surveys/nhis/multifactor/multi_screener.pdf (accessed July 2010).
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:

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 10
Total number of PDF views: 61 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 136 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 19th November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.