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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |