Validation of the Danish 7-day pre-coded food diary among adults: energy intake v. energy expenditure and recording length

Author:

Biltoft-Jensen Anja,Matthiessen Jeppe,Rasmussen Lone B.,Fagt Sisse,Groth Margit V.,Hels Ole

Abstract

Under-reporting of energy intake (EI) is a well-known problem when measuring dietary intake in free-living populations. The present study aimed at quantifying misreporting by comparing EI estimated from the Danish pre-coded food diary against energy expenditure (EE) measured with a validated position-and-motion instrument (ActiReg®). Further, the influence of recording length on EI:BMR, percentage consumers, the number of meal occasions and recorded food items per meal was examined. A total of 138 Danish volunteers aged 20–59 years wore the ActiReg® and recorded their food intake for 7 consecutive days. Data for 2504 participants from the National Dietary Survey 2000–2 were used for comparison of characteristics and recording length. The results showed that EI was underestimated by 12 % on average compared with EE measured by ActiReg® (PreMed AS, Oslo, Norway). The 95 % limits of agreement for EI and EE were − 6·29 and 3·09 MJ/d. Of the participants, 73 % were classified as acceptable reporters, 26 % as under-reporters and 1 % as over-reporters. EI:BMR was significantly lower on 1–3 consecutive recording days compared with 4–7 recording days (P < 0·03). Percentage consumers of selected food items increased with number of recording days. When recording length was 7 d, the number of reported food items per meal differed between acceptable reporters and under-reporters. EI:BMR was the same on 4 and 7 consecutive recording days. This was, however, a result of under-reporting in the beginning and the end of the 7 d reporting. Together, the results indicate that EI was underestimated at group level and that a 7 d recording is preferable to a 4 d recording period.

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Subject

Nutrition and Dietetics,Medicine (miscellaneous)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3