G L Ambrosini1, D Mackerras, N H de Klerk, A W Musk. 1. School of Population Health, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia. ginaa@sph.uwa.edu.au
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare a widely used Australian food-frequency questionnaire (FFQ) with diet records and consider the results in relation to its use in nutrition surveillance. DESIGN: Inter-method reliability study. SETTING: A randomised trial in subjects with past asbestos exposure. SUBJECTS: Seventy-two adults living in Western Australia. METHODS: A semi-quantitative FFQ developed by the Commonwealth Scientific Industrial Research Organisation in South Australia was administered after the completion of four 7-day diet records (DRs). RESULTS: Mean agreement between methods was not significantly different from 100% for many nutrients, but the limits of agreement indicated that, at the individual level, the FFQ over- or underestimated the DR by at least 50%. Mean agreement between methods decreased significantly with increasing intakes for the majority of nutrients. Pearson's correlation coefficients were less informative indicators of agreement compared with the limits of agreement. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate poor agreement between the FFQ and DR when estimating absolute intakes. Therefore, comparing intakes collected using this FFQ with specific cut-off points such as Recommended Dietary Intakes for nutrition surveillance may lead to seriously flawed conclusions about population intakes.
OBJECTIVES: To compare a widely used Australian food-frequency questionnaire (FFQ) with diet records and consider the results in relation to its use in nutrition surveillance. DESIGN: Inter-method reliability study. SETTING: A randomised trial in subjects with past asbestos exposure. SUBJECTS: Seventy-two adults living in Western Australia. METHODS: A semi-quantitative FFQ developed by the Commonwealth Scientific Industrial Research Organisation in South Australia was administered after the completion of four 7-day diet records (DRs). RESULTS: Mean agreement between methods was not significantly different from 100% for many nutrients, but the limits of agreement indicated that, at the individual level, the FFQ over- or underestimated the DR by at least 50%. Mean agreement between methods decreased significantly with increasing intakes for the majority of nutrients. Pearson's correlation coefficients were less informative indicators of agreement compared with the limits of agreement. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate poor agreement between the FFQ and DR when estimating absolute intakes. Therefore, comparing intakes collected using this FFQ with specific cut-off points such as Recommended Dietary Intakes for nutrition surveillance may lead to seriously flawed conclusions about population intakes.
Authors: Juliana Araujo Teixeira; Maria Luiza Baggio; Anna R Giuliano; Regina Mara Fisberg; Dirce Maria Lobo Marchioni Journal: J Am Diet Assoc Date: 2011-07
Authors: Vanessa A Farrell; Margaret Harris; Timothy G Lohman; Scott B Going; Cynthia A Thomson; Judith L Weber; Linda B Houtkooper Journal: J Am Diet Assoc Date: 2009-05
Authors: Mark C Perry; Leon M Straker; Wendy H Oddy; Peter B O'Sullivan; Anne J Smith Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2010-06-30 Impact factor: 2.362