PURPOSE: Although the empirical weight (regression-based) method has theoretical advantages over the traditional food composition method in predicting nutrient levels from food frequency questionnaires (FFQs), the empirical assessments have been limited. METHODS: We compared the validity of the two approaches for a 44-item questionnaire used in a population-based prospective study in Japan. Based on four 7-day diet records and questionnaire responses collected from a subsample of the prospective study (94 men and 107 women), we developed a food composition table and stepwise regression models to predict intakes of energy and 14 nutrients from the questionnaire. RESULTS: When we applied the two methods to an independent population (207 men and 166 women) providing a 3-day diet record and responding to a 36-item dietary questionnaire, energy-adjusted and deattenuated correlation coefficients between the questionnaire and the diet records were not higher for the empirical weight method than for the food composition method; the median (range) was 0.22 (0.07-0.57) for men and 0.23 (-0.09-0.62) for women in the former method, and 0.26 (-0.04-0.58) for men and 0.38 (0.18-0.67) for women in the latter method. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find the improved validity of FFQ by empirical weight method in predicting nutrient intakes.
PURPOSE: Although the empirical weight (regression-based) method has theoretical advantages over the traditional food composition method in predicting nutrient levels from food frequency questionnaires (FFQs), the empirical assessments have been limited. METHODS: We compared the validity of the two approaches for a 44-item questionnaire used in a population-based prospective study in Japan. Based on four 7-day diet records and questionnaire responses collected from a subsample of the prospective study (94 men and 107 women), we developed a food composition table and stepwise regression models to predict intakes of energy and 14 nutrients from the questionnaire. RESULTS: When we applied the two methods to an independent population (207 men and 166 women) providing a 3-day diet record and responding to a 36-item dietary questionnaire, energy-adjusted and deattenuated correlation coefficients between the questionnaire and the diet records were not higher for the empirical weight method than for the food composition method; the median (range) was 0.22 (0.07-0.57) for men and 0.23 (-0.09-0.62) for women in the former method, and 0.26 (-0.04-0.58) for men and 0.38 (0.18-0.67) for women in the latter method. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find the improved validity of FFQ by empirical weight method in predicting nutrient intakes.
Authors: Kana Wu; Donna Spiegelman; Tao Hou; Demetrius Albanes; Naomi E Allen; Sonja I Berndt; Piet A van den Brandt; Graham G Giles; Edward Giovannucci; R Alexandra Goldbohm; Gary G Goodman; Phyllis J Goodman; Niclas Håkansson; Manami Inoue; Timothy J Key; Laurence N Kolonel; Satu Männistö; Marjorie L McCullough; Marian L Neuhouser; Yikyung Park; Elizabeth A Platz; Jeannette M Schenk; Rashmi Sinha; Meir J Stampfer; Victoria L Stevens; Shoichiro Tsugane; Kala Visvanathan; Lynne R Wilkens; Alicja Wolk; Regina G Ziegler; Stephanie A Smith-Warner Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2016-05-15 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Xuehong Zhang; Donna Spiegelman; Laura Baglietto; Leslie Bernstein; Deborah A Boggs; Piet A van den Brandt; Julie E Buring; Susan M Gapstur; Graham G Giles; Edward Giovannucci; Gary Goodman; Susan E Hankinson; Kathy J Helzlsouer; Pamela L Horn-Ross; Manami Inoue; Seungyoun Jung; Polyna Khudyakov; Susanna C Larsson; Marie Lof; Marjorie L McCullough; Anthony B Miller; Marian L Neuhouser; Julie R Palmer; Yikyung Park; Kim Robien; Thomas E Rohan; Julie A Ross; Leo J Schouten; James M Shikany; Shoichiro Tsugane; Kala Visvanathan; Elisabete Weiderpass; Alicja Wolk; Walter C Willett; Shumin M Zhang; Regina G Ziegler; Stephanie A Smith-Warner Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2012-01-25 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Tianyi Wang; Hui Cai; Shizuka Sasazuki; Shoichiro Tsugane; Wei Zheng; Eo Rin Cho; Sun Ha Jee; Angelika Michel; Michael Pawlita; Yong-Bing Xiang; Yu-Tang Gao; Xiao-Ou Shu; Wei-Cheng You; Meira Epplein Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2016-10-31 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Seungyoun Jung; Donna Spiegelman; Laura Baglietto; Leslie Bernstein; Deborah A Boggs; Piet A van den Brandt; Julie E Buring; James R Cerhan; Mia M Gaudet; Graham G Giles; Gary Goodman; Niclas Hakansson; Susan E Hankinson; Kathy Helzlsouer; Pamela L Horn-Ross; Manami Inoue; Vittorio Krogh; Marie Lof; Marjorie L McCullough; Anthony B Miller; Marian L Neuhouser; Julie R Palmer; Yikyung Park; Kim Robien; Thomas E Rohan; Stephanie Scarmo; Catherine Schairer; Leo J Schouten; James M Shikany; Sabina Sieri; Schoichiro Tsugane; Kala Visvanathan; Elisabete Weiderpass; Walter C Willett; Alicja Wolk; Anne Zeleniuch-Jacquotte; Shumin M Zhang; Xuehong Zhang; Regina G Ziegler; Stephanie A Smith-Warner Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2013-01-24 Impact factor: 13.506