OBJECTIVE: To validate energy intake (EI) estimated from pre-coded food diaries against energy expenditure (EE) measured with a validated position-and-movement monitor (ActiReg) in groups of 13-year-old Norwegian schoolchildren. DESIGN: Two studies were conducted. In study 1 the monitoring period was 4 days; participants recorded their food intake for four consecutive weekdays using food diaries and wore the ActiReg during the same period. In study 2 the monitoring period was 7 days; participants recorded their food intake for four consecutive days but wore the ActiReg for a whole week. SETTINGS: Participants were recruited from grade 8 in a school in and one outside Oslo (Norway). SUBJECTS: Forty-one and 31 participants from study 1 and 2, respectively, completed the study. RESULTS: The group average EI was 34% lower than the measured EE in study 1 and 24% lower in study 2. The width of the 95% confidence limits of agreement in a Bland-Altman plot for EI and EE varied from -0.2 MJ to 8.2 MJ in study 1 and from -2.3 MJ to 6.9 MJ in study 2. The Pearson correlation coefficients between reported energy intake and expenditure were 0.47 (P=0.002) in study 1 and 0.74 (P<0.001) in study 2. CONCLUSION: The data showed that there was substantial variability in the accuracy of the food diary at the individual level. Furthermore, the diary underestimated the average energy intake. The ability of the food diary to rank individuals according to energy intake was found to be good in one of the studies and moderate in the other.
OBJECTIVE: To validate energy intake (EI) estimated from pre-coded food diaries against energy expenditure (EE) measured with a validated position-and-movement monitor (ActiReg) in groups of 13-year-old Norwegian schoolchildren. DESIGN: Two studies were conducted. In study 1 the monitoring period was 4 days; participants recorded their food intake for four consecutive weekdays using food diaries and wore the ActiReg during the same period. In study 2 the monitoring period was 7 days; participants recorded their food intake for four consecutive days but wore the ActiReg for a whole week. SETTINGS: Participants were recruited from grade 8 in a school in and one outside Oslo (Norway). SUBJECTS: Forty-one and 31 participants from study 1 and 2, respectively, completed the study. RESULTS: The group average EI was 34% lower than the measured EE in study 1 and 24% lower in study 2. The width of the 95% confidence limits of agreement in a Bland-Altman plot for EI and EE varied from -0.2 MJ to 8.2 MJ in study 1 and from -2.3 MJ to 6.9 MJ in study 2. The Pearson correlation coefficients between reported energy intake and expenditure were 0.47 (P=0.002) in study 1 and 0.74 (P<0.001) in study 2. CONCLUSION: The data showed that there was substantial variability in the accuracy of the food diary at the individual level. Furthermore, the diary underestimated the average energy intake. The ability of the food diary to rank individuals according to energy intake was found to be good in one of the studies and moderate in the other.
Authors: Sharon I Kirkpatrick; Douglas Midthune; Kevin W Dodd; Nancy Potischman; Amy F Subar; Frances E Thompson Journal: J Acad Nutr Diet Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 4.910
Authors: Jeppe Matthiessen; Anja Biltoft-Jensen; Lone B Rasmussen; Ole Hels; Sisse Fagt; Margit V Groth Journal: Eur J Epidemiol Date: 2008 Impact factor: 8.082
Authors: A L Brantsaeter; K M Owe; M Haugen; J Alexander; H M Meltzer; M P Longnecker Journal: Scand J Med Sci Sports Date: 2009-03-31 Impact factor: 4.221
Authors: Berit W Rothausen; Jeppe Matthiessen; Margit V Groth; Per B Brockhoff; Lene F Andersen; Ellen Trolle Journal: Food Nutr Res Date: 2012-02-15 Impact factor: 3.894