3.9 Article

Relative reliability and validity of the Block Kids Questionnaire among youth aged 10 to 17 years

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DIETETIC ASSOCIATION
卷 108, 期 5, 页码 862-866

出版社

AMER DIETETIC ASSOC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jada.2008.02.015

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This cross-sectional study tested the reliability and validity of the Block Kids Questionnaire to assess diet during the past 7 days. Within a 7-day period, 10- to 17-year-old children and adolescents completed two 24-hour dietary recalls by telephone, followed by the Block Kids Questionnaire at the end of the week. Test-retest reliability was assessed using intraclass correlations for 18 participants who completed a second Block Kids Questionnaire 1 month later. Validity of the Block Kids Questionnaire compared to the 24-hour dietary recall was assessed for the whole sample and by age group using paired t tests and Pearson correlation coefficients adjusted for attenuation and energy intake. Participants were 83 children and adolescents (57% Hispanic, 21% African-American, and 23% white; 53% were female subjects, mean age 13 years). The Block Kids Questionnaire mean daily consumption values were higher for percent energy from carbohydrate, and servings of fruit, 100% fruit juice, and vegetables, and lower for all other categories compared to the 24-hour dietary recall. All reliability intraclass correlations were >0.30, except percent energy from protein and fruit/vegetable servings. Significant differences in the means between the two dietary assessment methods were noted for most nutrients/food groups. The adjusted correlation coefficients ranged from 0.69 for percent energy from carbohydrate to -0.03 for grain servings, with 60% of the food group servings <0.18. Overall, the majority of the correlation coefficients for children aged >12 years were higher than those aged <= 12 years. These results suggest that the Block Kids Questionnaire has validity for some nutrients, but not most food groups assessed, and appears more useful for adolescents.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据