3.8 Article

Dietary intakes of Canadians in the 1990s using population-weighted data derived from the provincial nutrition surveys

出版社

NATL RESEARCH COUNCIL CANADA-N R C RESEARCH PRESS
DOI: 10.1139/H06-096

关键词

nutrition; diet; intake; health; surveys

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Provincial nutrition surveys of adults were conducted between 1990 and 1999 in Canada. Eight reports have been issued, and one is forthcoming. The purpose of this study was to estimate the national dietary intake of adult Canadians, using the publicly available data. Group mean-nutrient-intake data from 16915 adults, aged 18 to 84 years, from published provincial reports were collated by age and sex for each of 9 provinces (Manitoba data were unavailable). Using Canadian census data appropriate to the year of collection, intake data were weighted to provide I national intake value for each nutrient, by 8 age and sex categories. In general, the energy and nutrient intake of adults decreased with age. For every age group, with the exception of vitamin C, intake of nutrients by men was greater than that by women. On the basis of a comparison of recently recommended intakes (Dietary Reference Intakes), the nutrients that are of concern because of inadequate intake include dietary fibre, calcium, magnesium, and folate. The data demonstrate the impact of folate fortification on folate intake; the mean intake became twice that of prefortification levels. This study used group mean-intake data; therefore, we cannot make definitive conclusions about the prevalence of inadequacy for the nutrients. Because of limitations with some provincial response rates, our data should not be construed as representative of the Canadian population. However, because these surveys were completed between the 19701972 Nutrition Canada Survey and the 2004 Canadian Community Health Survey, these population-weighted data might be a useful point of comparison for monitoring trends in nutrient intake from food.

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

3.8
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