4.4 Article

Dietary Intake Measured from a Self-Administered, Online 24-Hour Recall System Compared with 4-Day Diet Records in an Adult US Population

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE ACADEMY OF NUTRITION AND DIETETICS
卷 112, 期 10, 页码 1642-1647

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jand.2012.06.003

关键词

24-hour recall; 4-day food record; Validity

资金

  1. George Mason University Provost's Office Creative Award Mechanism

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The objective of this study was to compare nutrient intake of two 24-hour recalls collected using the Automated Self-Administered 24-Hour Dietary Recall to a 4-day food record. A convenience sample of university-affiliated adults was chosen because of the diverse population at this university. Ninety-three participants completed the 4-day record and were then prompted to complete two 24-hour recalls within 2 weeks after. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated for nutrient intake and Healthy Eating Index 2005 (HEI-2005), a summary measure of diet quality. Nutrients and HEI-2005 were also divided into quartiles and percent agreement and kappa values were calculated. Results' indicated that mean nutrient intakes were similar across the recall and record. Pearson correlations comparing the record and recall ranged from 0.16 to 0.78; with most correlations being between 0.4 and 0.6. For quartiles of dietary intake, percent agreement was moderately high (62.6% to 79.8%), with low to moderate kappa values (kappa=0.11 to 0.52). The 24-hour recall provided a good overall ranking of intake compared to a 4-day food record. Overall correlations and percent agreement were moderate across the nutrients and HEI-2005, suggesting that the 24-recalls may have been capturing different information than the food record in our population. Individual researchers will need to weigh the benefits of a more automated system, such as efficiency, against the potential loss of food item detail and potential need for larger sample sizes, for their particular study populations. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2012;112:1642-1647.

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

4.4
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