Cargando…

A cross-over study comparing an online versus a paper 7-day food record: focus on total water intake data and participant’s perception of the records

PURPOSE: To compare (1) fluid, food and nutrient intake obtained with a paper versus an online version of a 7-day food record and (2) user’s acceptability of both versions of the food record. METHODS: A cross-over study was carried out in 2010 in France. A total of 246 participants aged 18–60 years...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Monnerie, B., Tavoularis, L. G., Guelinckx, I., Hebel, P., Boisvieux, T., Cousin, A., Le Bellego, L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4473085/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26066355
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00394-015-0945-7
_version_ 1782377181147561984
author Monnerie, B.
Tavoularis, L. G.
Guelinckx, I.
Hebel, P.
Boisvieux, T.
Cousin, A.
Le Bellego, L.
author_facet Monnerie, B.
Tavoularis, L. G.
Guelinckx, I.
Hebel, P.
Boisvieux, T.
Cousin, A.
Le Bellego, L.
author_sort Monnerie, B.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To compare (1) fluid, food and nutrient intake obtained with a paper versus an online version of a 7-day food record and (2) user’s acceptability of both versions of the food record. METHODS: A cross-over study was carried out in 2010 in France. A total of 246 participants aged 18–60 years reported their food and fluid intake using both versions of the 7-day food record, separated by a 7- to 14-day washout period. To help participants in estimating consumed portions, both versions of the food record were supported by a photographic booklet of standard portions and containers. At the end of the study protocol, participants completed a questionnaire designed to assess the acceptability of the two questionnaires. RESULTS: The reported water intake of fluids was significantly higher with the online version compared with the paper version (respectively 1348 ± 36 and 1219 ± 34 mL/day, p < 0.0001). No difference was found between methods in terms of energy intake and the consumption of most food categories, macro- and micronutrients. Furthermore, 77 % of the participants preferred the online method to the paper version. CONCLUSIONS: Fluid intake, but not food intake, reported with the online 7-day food record was higher in comparison with the paper version. In addition, the online version was preferred by users. In population surveys, the online record is therefore a relevant alternative, and even a preferred alternative in the case of fluid intake, to the paper record.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4473085
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44730852015-06-22 A cross-over study comparing an online versus a paper 7-day food record: focus on total water intake data and participant’s perception of the records Monnerie, B. Tavoularis, L. G. Guelinckx, I. Hebel, P. Boisvieux, T. Cousin, A. Le Bellego, L. Eur J Nutr Original Contribution PURPOSE: To compare (1) fluid, food and nutrient intake obtained with a paper versus an online version of a 7-day food record and (2) user’s acceptability of both versions of the food record. METHODS: A cross-over study was carried out in 2010 in France. A total of 246 participants aged 18–60 years reported their food and fluid intake using both versions of the 7-day food record, separated by a 7- to 14-day washout period. To help participants in estimating consumed portions, both versions of the food record were supported by a photographic booklet of standard portions and containers. At the end of the study protocol, participants completed a questionnaire designed to assess the acceptability of the two questionnaires. RESULTS: The reported water intake of fluids was significantly higher with the online version compared with the paper version (respectively 1348 ± 36 and 1219 ± 34 mL/day, p < 0.0001). No difference was found between methods in terms of energy intake and the consumption of most food categories, macro- and micronutrients. Furthermore, 77 % of the participants preferred the online method to the paper version. CONCLUSIONS: Fluid intake, but not food intake, reported with the online 7-day food record was higher in comparison with the paper version. In addition, the online version was preferred by users. In population surveys, the online record is therefore a relevant alternative, and even a preferred alternative in the case of fluid intake, to the paper record. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2015-06-12 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4473085/ /pubmed/26066355 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00394-015-0945-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Contribution
Monnerie, B.
Tavoularis, L. G.
Guelinckx, I.
Hebel, P.
Boisvieux, T.
Cousin, A.
Le Bellego, L.
A cross-over study comparing an online versus a paper 7-day food record: focus on total water intake data and participant’s perception of the records
title A cross-over study comparing an online versus a paper 7-day food record: focus on total water intake data and participant’s perception of the records
title_full A cross-over study comparing an online versus a paper 7-day food record: focus on total water intake data and participant’s perception of the records
title_fullStr A cross-over study comparing an online versus a paper 7-day food record: focus on total water intake data and participant’s perception of the records
title_full_unstemmed A cross-over study comparing an online versus a paper 7-day food record: focus on total water intake data and participant’s perception of the records
title_short A cross-over study comparing an online versus a paper 7-day food record: focus on total water intake data and participant’s perception of the records
title_sort cross-over study comparing an online versus a paper 7-day food record: focus on total water intake data and participant’s perception of the records
topic Original Contribution
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4473085/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26066355
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00394-015-0945-7
work_keys_str_mv AT monnerieb acrossoverstudycomparinganonlineversusapaper7dayfoodrecordfocusontotalwaterintakedataandparticipantsperceptionoftherecords
AT tavoularislg acrossoverstudycomparinganonlineversusapaper7dayfoodrecordfocusontotalwaterintakedataandparticipantsperceptionoftherecords
AT guelinckxi acrossoverstudycomparinganonlineversusapaper7dayfoodrecordfocusontotalwaterintakedataandparticipantsperceptionoftherecords
AT hebelp acrossoverstudycomparinganonlineversusapaper7dayfoodrecordfocusontotalwaterintakedataandparticipantsperceptionoftherecords
AT boisvieuxt acrossoverstudycomparinganonlineversusapaper7dayfoodrecordfocusontotalwaterintakedataandparticipantsperceptionoftherecords
AT cousina acrossoverstudycomparinganonlineversusapaper7dayfoodrecordfocusontotalwaterintakedataandparticipantsperceptionoftherecords
AT lebellegol acrossoverstudycomparinganonlineversusapaper7dayfoodrecordfocusontotalwaterintakedataandparticipantsperceptionoftherecords
AT monnerieb crossoverstudycomparinganonlineversusapaper7dayfoodrecordfocusontotalwaterintakedataandparticipantsperceptionoftherecords
AT tavoularislg crossoverstudycomparinganonlineversusapaper7dayfoodrecordfocusontotalwaterintakedataandparticipantsperceptionoftherecords
AT guelinckxi crossoverstudycomparinganonlineversusapaper7dayfoodrecordfocusontotalwaterintakedataandparticipantsperceptionoftherecords
AT hebelp crossoverstudycomparinganonlineversusapaper7dayfoodrecordfocusontotalwaterintakedataandparticipantsperceptionoftherecords
AT boisvieuxt crossoverstudycomparinganonlineversusapaper7dayfoodrecordfocusontotalwaterintakedataandparticipantsperceptionoftherecords
AT cousina crossoverstudycomparinganonlineversusapaper7dayfoodrecordfocusontotalwaterintakedataandparticipantsperceptionoftherecords
AT lebellegol crossoverstudycomparinganonlineversusapaper7dayfoodrecordfocusontotalwaterintakedataandparticipantsperceptionoftherecords