BACKGROUND: Underreporting of energy intake is associated with self-reported diet measures and appears to be selective according to personal characteristics. Doubly labeled water is an unbiased reference biomarker for energy intake that may be used to assess underreporting. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to determine which factors are associated with underreporting of energy intake on food-frequency questionnaires (FFQs) and 24-h dietary recalls (24HRs). DESIGN: The study participants were 484 men and women aged 40-69 y who resided in Montgomery County, MD. Using the doubly labeled water method to measure total energy expenditure, we considered numerous psychosocial, lifestyle, and sociodemographic factors in multiple logistic regression models for prediction of the probability of underreporting on the FFQ and 24HR. RESULTS: In the FFQ models, fear of negative evaluation, weight-loss history, and percentage of energy from fat were the best predictors of underreporting in women (R(2) = 0.09); body mass index, comparison of activity level with that of others of the same sex and age, and eating frequency were the best predictors in men (R(2) = 0.10). In the 24HR models, social desirability, fear of negative evaluation, body mass index, percentage of energy from fat, usual activity, and variability in number of meals per day were the best predictors of underreporting in women (R(2) = 0.22); social desirability, dietary restraint, body mass index, eating frequency, dieting history, and education were the best predictors in men (R(2) = 0.25). CONCLUSION: Although the final models were significantly related to underreporting on both the FFQ and the 24HR, the amount of variation explained by these models was relatively low, especially for the FFQ.
BACKGROUND: Underreporting of energy intake is associated with self-reported diet measures and appears to be selective according to personal characteristics. Doubly labeled water is an unbiased reference biomarker for energy intake that may be used to assess underreporting. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to determine which factors are associated with underreporting of energy intake on food-frequency questionnaires (FFQs) and 24-h dietary recalls (24HRs). DESIGN: The study participants were 484 men and women aged 40-69 y who resided in Montgomery County, MD. Using the doubly labeled water method to measure total energy expenditure, we considered numerous psychosocial, lifestyle, and sociodemographic factors in multiple logistic regression models for prediction of the probability of underreporting on the FFQ and 24HR. RESULTS: In the FFQ models, fear of negative evaluation, weight-loss history, and percentage of energy from fat were the best predictors of underreporting in women (R(2) = 0.09); body mass index, comparison of activity level with that of others of the same sex and age, and eating frequency were the best predictors in men (R(2) = 0.10). In the 24HR models, social desirability, fear of negative evaluation, body mass index, percentage of energy from fat, usual activity, and variability in number of meals per day were the best predictors of underreporting in women (R(2) = 0.22); social desirability, dietary restraint, body mass index, eating frequency, dieting history, and education were the best predictors in men (R(2) = 0.25). CONCLUSION: Although the final models were significantly related to underreporting on both the FFQ and the 24HR, the amount of variation explained by these models was relatively low, especially for the FFQ.
Authors: Fengqing Zhu; Anand Mariappan; Carol J Boushey; Deb Kerr; Kyle D Lutes; David S Ebert; Edward J Delp Journal: Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng Date: 2008-03-20
Authors: Arpana Agrawal; Neal D Freedman; Yu-Ching Cheng; Peng Lin; John R Shaffer; Qi Sun; Kira Taylor; Brian Yaspan; John W Cole; Marilyn C Cornelis; Rebecca S DeSensi; Annette Fitzpatrick; Gerardo Heiss; Jae H Kang; Jeffrey O'Connell; Siiri Bennett; Ebony Bookman; Kathleen K Bucholz; Neil Caporaso; Richard Crout; Danielle M Dick; Howard J Edenberg; Alison Goate; Victor Hesselbrock; Steven Kittner; John Kramer; John I Nurnberger; Lu Qi; John P Rice; Marc Schuckit; Rob M van Dam; Eric Boerwinkle; Frank Hu; Steven Levy; Mary Marazita; Braxton D Mitchell; Louis R Pasquale; Laura J Bierut Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2012-02-01 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Amy F Subar; Laurence S Freedman; Janet A Tooze; Sharon I Kirkpatrick; Carol Boushey; Marian L Neuhouser; Frances E Thompson; Nancy Potischman; Patricia M Guenther; Valerie Tarasuk; Jill Reedy; Susan M Krebs-Smith Journal: J Nutr Date: 2015-10-14 Impact factor: 4.798
Authors: Robin P Shook; Gregory A Hand; Clemens Drenowatz; James R Hebert; Amanda E Paluch; John E Blundell; James O Hill; Peter T Katzmarzyk; Timothy S Church; Steven N Blair Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2015-11-11 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Peter J Aggett; Jean-Michel Antoine; Nils-Georg Asp; France Bellisle; Laura Contor; John H Cummings; John Howlett; Detlef J G Müller; Christoph Persin; Loek T J Pijls; Gerhard Rechkemmer; Sandra Tuijtelaars; Hans Verhagen Journal: Eur J Nutr Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 5.614
Authors: B Olendzki; E Procter-Gray; M F Magee; G Youssef; K Kane; L Churchill; J Ockene; W Li Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2017 Impact factor: 4.075
Authors: Barbara Resnick; Ann L Gruber-Baldini; Gregory Hicks; Glen Ostir; N Jennifer Klinedinst; Denise Orwig; Jay Magaziner Journal: Rehabil Nurs Date: 2015-10-23 Impact factor: 1.625