Cargando…
Comparison of weighed food record procedures for the reference methods in two validation studies of food frequency questionnaires
BACKGROUND: Although open-ended dietary assessment methods, such as weighed food records (WFRs), are generally considered to be comparable, differences between procedures may influence outcome when WFRs are conducted independently. In this paper, we assess the procedures of WFRs in two studies to de...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5498406/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28302344 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.je.2016.08.008 |
_version_ | 1783248281213599744 |
---|---|
author | Ishii, Yuri Ishihara, Junko Takachi, Ribeka Shinozawa, Yurie Imaeda, Nahomi Goto, Chiho Wakai, Kenji Takahashi, Toshiaki Iso, Hiroyasu Nakamura, Kazutoshi Tanaka, Junta Shimazu, Taichi Yamaji, Taiki Sasazuki, Shizuka Sawada, Norie Iwasaki, Motoki Mikami, Haruo Kuriki, Kiyonori Naito, Mariko Okamoto, Naoko Kondo, Fumi Hosono, Satoyo Miyagawa, Naoko Ozaki, Etsuko Katsuura-Kamano, Sakurako Ohnaka, Keizo Nanri, Hinako Tsunematsu-Nakahata, Noriko Kayama, Takamasa Kurihara, Ayako Kojima, Shiomi Tanaka, Hideo Tsugane, Shoichiro |
author_facet | Ishii, Yuri Ishihara, Junko Takachi, Ribeka Shinozawa, Yurie Imaeda, Nahomi Goto, Chiho Wakai, Kenji Takahashi, Toshiaki Iso, Hiroyasu Nakamura, Kazutoshi Tanaka, Junta Shimazu, Taichi Yamaji, Taiki Sasazuki, Shizuka Sawada, Norie Iwasaki, Motoki Mikami, Haruo Kuriki, Kiyonori Naito, Mariko Okamoto, Naoko Kondo, Fumi Hosono, Satoyo Miyagawa, Naoko Ozaki, Etsuko Katsuura-Kamano, Sakurako Ohnaka, Keizo Nanri, Hinako Tsunematsu-Nakahata, Noriko Kayama, Takamasa Kurihara, Ayako Kojima, Shiomi Tanaka, Hideo Tsugane, Shoichiro |
author_sort | Ishii, Yuri |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Although open-ended dietary assessment methods, such as weighed food records (WFRs), are generally considered to be comparable, differences between procedures may influence outcome when WFRs are conducted independently. In this paper, we assess the procedures of WFRs in two studies to describe their dietary assessment procedures and compare the subsequent outcomes. METHODS: WFRs of 12 days (3 days for four seasons) were conducted as reference methods for intake data, in accordance with the study protocol, among a subsample of participants of two large cohort studies. We compared the WFR procedures descriptively. We also compared some dietary intake variables, such as the frequency of foods and dishes and contributing foods, to determine whether there were differences in the portion size distribution and intra- and inter-individual variation in nutrient intakes caused by the difference in procedures. RESULTS: General procedures of the dietary records were conducted in accordance with the National Health and Nutrition Survey and were the same for both studies. Differences were seen in 1) selection of multiple days (non-consecutive days versus consecutive days); and 2) survey sheet recording method (individual versus family participation). However, the foods contributing to intake of energy and selected nutrients, the portion size distribution, and intra- and inter-individual variation in nutrient intakes were similar between the two studies. CONCLUSION: Our comparison of WFR procedures in two independent studies revealed several differences. Notwithstanding these procedural differences, however, the subsequent outcomes were similar. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5498406 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-54984062017-07-12 Comparison of weighed food record procedures for the reference methods in two validation studies of food frequency questionnaires Ishii, Yuri Ishihara, Junko Takachi, Ribeka Shinozawa, Yurie Imaeda, Nahomi Goto, Chiho Wakai, Kenji Takahashi, Toshiaki Iso, Hiroyasu Nakamura, Kazutoshi Tanaka, Junta Shimazu, Taichi Yamaji, Taiki Sasazuki, Shizuka Sawada, Norie Iwasaki, Motoki Mikami, Haruo Kuriki, Kiyonori Naito, Mariko Okamoto, Naoko Kondo, Fumi Hosono, Satoyo Miyagawa, Naoko Ozaki, Etsuko Katsuura-Kamano, Sakurako Ohnaka, Keizo Nanri, Hinako Tsunematsu-Nakahata, Noriko Kayama, Takamasa Kurihara, Ayako Kojima, Shiomi Tanaka, Hideo Tsugane, Shoichiro J Epidemiol Original Article BACKGROUND: Although open-ended dietary assessment methods, such as weighed food records (WFRs), are generally considered to be comparable, differences between procedures may influence outcome when WFRs are conducted independently. In this paper, we assess the procedures of WFRs in two studies to describe their dietary assessment procedures and compare the subsequent outcomes. METHODS: WFRs of 12 days (3 days for four seasons) were conducted as reference methods for intake data, in accordance with the study protocol, among a subsample of participants of two large cohort studies. We compared the WFR procedures descriptively. We also compared some dietary intake variables, such as the frequency of foods and dishes and contributing foods, to determine whether there were differences in the portion size distribution and intra- and inter-individual variation in nutrient intakes caused by the difference in procedures. RESULTS: General procedures of the dietary records were conducted in accordance with the National Health and Nutrition Survey and were the same for both studies. Differences were seen in 1) selection of multiple days (non-consecutive days versus consecutive days); and 2) survey sheet recording method (individual versus family participation). However, the foods contributing to intake of energy and selected nutrients, the portion size distribution, and intra- and inter-individual variation in nutrient intakes were similar between the two studies. CONCLUSION: Our comparison of WFR procedures in two independent studies revealed several differences. Notwithstanding these procedural differences, however, the subsequent outcomes were similar. Elsevier 2017-03-13 /pmc/articles/PMC5498406/ /pubmed/28302344 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.je.2016.08.008 Text en © 2017 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original Article Ishii, Yuri Ishihara, Junko Takachi, Ribeka Shinozawa, Yurie Imaeda, Nahomi Goto, Chiho Wakai, Kenji Takahashi, Toshiaki Iso, Hiroyasu Nakamura, Kazutoshi Tanaka, Junta Shimazu, Taichi Yamaji, Taiki Sasazuki, Shizuka Sawada, Norie Iwasaki, Motoki Mikami, Haruo Kuriki, Kiyonori Naito, Mariko Okamoto, Naoko Kondo, Fumi Hosono, Satoyo Miyagawa, Naoko Ozaki, Etsuko Katsuura-Kamano, Sakurako Ohnaka, Keizo Nanri, Hinako Tsunematsu-Nakahata, Noriko Kayama, Takamasa Kurihara, Ayako Kojima, Shiomi Tanaka, Hideo Tsugane, Shoichiro Comparison of weighed food record procedures for the reference methods in two validation studies of food frequency questionnaires |
title | Comparison of weighed food record procedures for the reference methods in two validation studies of food frequency questionnaires |
title_full | Comparison of weighed food record procedures for the reference methods in two validation studies of food frequency questionnaires |
title_fullStr | Comparison of weighed food record procedures for the reference methods in two validation studies of food frequency questionnaires |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of weighed food record procedures for the reference methods in two validation studies of food frequency questionnaires |
title_short | Comparison of weighed food record procedures for the reference methods in two validation studies of food frequency questionnaires |
title_sort | comparison of weighed food record procedures for the reference methods in two validation studies of food frequency questionnaires |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5498406/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28302344 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.je.2016.08.008 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ishiiyuri comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT ishiharajunko comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT takachiribeka comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT shinozawayurie comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT imaedanahomi comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT gotochiho comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT wakaikenji comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT takahashitoshiaki comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT isohiroyasu comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT nakamurakazutoshi comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT tanakajunta comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT shimazutaichi comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT yamajitaiki comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT sasazukishizuka comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT sawadanorie comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT iwasakimotoki comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT mikamiharuo comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT kurikikiyonori comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT naitomariko comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT okamotonaoko comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT kondofumi comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT hosonosatoyo comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT miyagawanaoko comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT ozakietsuko comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT katsuurakamanosakurako comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT ohnakakeizo comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT nanrihinako comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT tsunematsunakahatanoriko comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT kayamatakamasa comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT kuriharaayako comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT kojimashiomi comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT tanakahideo comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires AT tsuganeshoichiro comparisonofweighedfoodrecordproceduresforthereferencemethodsintwovalidationstudiesoffoodfrequencyquestionnaires |