Effects of dietary assessment methods on assessing risk of nutrient intake adequacy at the population level: from theory to practice

Author:

Ribas-Barba Lourdes,Serra-Majem Lluís,Román-Viñas Blanca,Ngo Joy,García-Álvarez Alicia

Abstract

The present study evaluated how applying different dietary methods affects risk assessment of inadequate intakes at the population level. A pooled analysis was conducted using data from two Spanish regional representative surveys both applying similar methodology with a total sample of 2615 individuals aged 12–80. Diet was assessed in the entire sample applying data from one 24 h recall (24HR), a mean of two non-consecutive 24HR, both crude and adjusted for intraindividual variability, and a FFQ. Intakes of vitamins A, C, E, thiamin, riboflavin, niacin, vitamin B6, vitamin B12, Fe, Mg, P and Zn were compared to the average nutrient requirement (ANR or estimated average requirement) in the entire sample and also excluding under-reporters applying the ANR cut-point method (and the probability approach for Fe). Higher percentages of intakes below the ANR were seen for 1–24HR and the mean of 2–24HR, except for nutrients with the highest rates of inadequacy (vitamins A, E, folate and Mg). For these micronutrients, higher percentages of inadequacy were obtained by adjusted 24HR data and the lowest with FFQ. For the remaining nutrients, adjusted data gave the lowest inadequacy percentages. The best concordance was seen between 2–24HR and 1–24HR as well as for adjusted 24HR, with the least observed between FFQ and the other methods. Exclusion of under-reporters considerably reduced inadequacy in both daily methods and FFQ. Crude daily data gave higher estimates of inadequate intakes than adjusted data or FFQ. Reproducibility of daily methods was also reasonably good. Results may differ depending on the micronutrient thus impeding reaching conclusions/recommendations common for all micronutrients.

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