OBJECTIVE: Validation-study data are used to illustrate that conventional energy and macronutrient (protein, carbohydrate, fat) variables, which disregard accuracy of reported items and amounts, misrepresent reporting accuracy. Reporting-error-sensitive variables are proposed which classify reported items as matches or intrusions, and reported amounts as corresponding or overreported. METHODS: 58 girls and 63 boys were each observed eating school meals on 2 days separated by > or =4 weeks, and interviewed the morning after each observation day. One interview per child had forward-order (morning-to-evening) prompts; one had reverse-order prompts. Original food-item-level analyses found a sex-x-order prompt interaction for omission rates. Current analyses compared reference (observed) and reported information transformed to energy and macronutrients. RESULTS: Using conventional variables, reported amounts were less than reference amounts (ps<0.001; paired t-tests); report rates were higher for the first than second interview for energy, protein, and carbohydrate (ps< or =0.049; mixed models). Using reporting-error-sensitive variables, correspondence rates were higher for girls with forward- but boys with reverse-order prompts (ps< or =0.041; mixed models); inflation ratios were lower with reverse- than forward-order prompts for energy, carbohydrate, and fat (ps< or =0.045; mixed models). CONCLUSIONS: Conventional variables overestimated reporting accuracy and masked order prompt and sex effects. Reporting-error-sensitive variables are recommended when assessing accuracy for energy and macronutrients in validation studies.
OBJECTIVE: Validation-study data are used to illustrate that conventional energy and macronutrient (protein, carbohydrate, fat) variables, which disregard accuracy of reported items and amounts, misrepresent reporting accuracy. Reporting-error-sensitive variables are proposed which classify reported items as matches or intrusions, and reported amounts as corresponding or overreported. METHODS: 58 girls and 63 boys were each observed eating school meals on 2 days separated by > or =4 weeks, and interviewed the morning after each observation day. One interview per child had forward-order (morning-to-evening) prompts; one had reverse-order prompts. Original food-item-level analyses found a sex-x-order prompt interaction for omission rates. Current analyses compared reference (observed) and reported information transformed to energy and macronutrients. RESULTS: Using conventional variables, reported amounts were less than reference amounts (ps<0.001; paired t-tests); report rates were higher for the first than second interview for energy, protein, and carbohydrate (ps< or =0.049; mixed models). Using reporting-error-sensitive variables, correspondence rates were higher for girls with forward- but boys with reverse-order prompts (ps< or =0.041; mixed models); inflation ratios were lower with reverse- than forward-order prompts for energy, carbohydrate, and fat (ps< or =0.045; mixed models). CONCLUSIONS: Conventional variables overestimated reporting accuracy and masked order prompt and sex effects. Reporting-error-sensitive variables are recommended when assessing accuracy for energy and macronutrients in validation studies.
Authors: Suzanne Domel Baxter; William O Thompson; Albert F Smith; Mark S Litaker; Zenong Yin; Francesca H A Frye; Caroline H Guinn; Michelle L Baglio; Nicole M Shaffer Journal: Prev Med Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: J Keith Jensen; Deborah Gustafson; Carol J Boushey; Garry Auld; Margaret Ann Bock; Christine M Bruhn; Kathe Gabel; Scottie Misner; Rachel Novotny; Louise Peck; Marsha Read Journal: J Am Diet Assoc Date: 2004-05
Authors: Suzanne Domel Baxter; Albert F Smith; Mark S Litaker; Caroline H Guinn; Nicole M Shaffer; Michelle L Baglio; Francesca H A Frye Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Janet M Warren; C Jeya K Henry; M Barbara E Livingstone; Helen J Lightowler; Suzanne M Bradshaw; Sylvia Perwaiz Journal: Public Health Nutr Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 4.022
Authors: Tom Baranowski; Noemi Islam; Janice Baranowski; Karen W Cullen; Dawnell Myres; Tara Marsh; Moor Carl de Journal: J Am Diet Assoc Date: 2002-03
Authors: Janet A Tooze; Amy F Subar; Frances E Thompson; Richard Troiano; Arthur Schatzkin; Victor Kipnis Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Suzanne Domel Baxter; William O Thompson; Mark S Litaker; Caroline H Guinn; Francesca H A Frye; Michelle L Baglio; Nicole M Shaffer Journal: J Nutr Educ Behav Date: 2003 May-Jun Impact factor: 3.045
Authors: Suzanne D Baxter; David B Hitchcock; Caroline H Guinn; Kate K Vaadi; Megan P Puryear; Julie A Royer; Kerry L McIver; Marsha Dowda; Russell R Pate; Dawn K Wilson Journal: J Acad Nutr Diet Date: 2014-04-24 Impact factor: 4.910
Authors: Suzanne D Baxter; Caroline H Guinn; Albert F Smith; David B Hitchcock; Julie A Royer; Megan P Puryear; Kathleen L Collins; Alyssa L Smith Journal: Br J Nutr Date: 2016-02-11 Impact factor: 3.718
Authors: Caroline H Guinn; Suzanne D Baxter; Julie A Royer; James W Hardin; Alyssa J Mackelprang; Albert F Smith Journal: J Health Psychol Date: 2010-05
Authors: Suzanne Domel Baxter; Julie A Royer; Caroline H Guinn; James W Hardin; Albert F Smith Journal: Public Health Nutr Date: 2008-11-10 Impact factor: 4.022
Authors: Suzanne D Baxter; Albert F Smith; David B Hitchcock; Caroline H Guinn; Julie A Royer; Kathleen L Collins; Alyssa L Smith; Megan P Puryear; Kate K Vaadi; Christopher J Finney; Patricia H Miller Journal: J Nutr Date: 2015-07-29 Impact factor: 4.798
Authors: Suzanne Domel Baxter; James W Hardin; Caroline H Guinn; Julie A Royer; Alyssa J Mackelprang; Albert F Smith Journal: J Am Diet Assoc Date: 2009-05