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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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
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