OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the performance of the food-frequency questionnaire (FFQ) administered to participants in the US NIH-AARP (National Institutes of Health-American Association of Retired Persons) Diet and Health Study, a cohort of 566 404 persons living in the USA and aged 50-71 years at baseline in 1995. DESIGN: The 124-item FFQ was evaluated within a measurement error model using two non-consecutive 24-hour dietary recalls (24HRs) as the reference. SETTING: Participants were from six states (California, Florida, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, North Carolina and Louisiana) and two metropolitan areas (Atlanta, Georgia and Detroit, Michigan). SUBJECTS: A subgroup of the cohort consisting of 2053 individuals. RESULTS: For the 26 nutrient constituents examined, estimated correlations with true intake (not energy-adjusted) ranged from 0.22 to 0.67, and attenuation factors ranged from 0.15 to 0.49. When adjusted for reported energy intake, performance improved; estimated correlations with true intake ranged from 0.36 to 0.76, and attenuation factors ranged from 0.24 to 0.68. These results compare favourably with those from other large prospective studies. However, previous biomarker-based studies suggest that, due to correlation of errors in FFQs and self-report reference instruments such as the 24HR, the correlations and attenuation factors observed in most calibration studies, including ours, tend to overestimate FFQ performance. CONCLUSION: The performance of the FFQ in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study, in conjunction with the study's large sample size and wide range of dietary intake, is likely to allow detection of moderate (> or =1.8) relative risks between many energy-adjusted nutrients and common cancers.
OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the performance of the food-frequency questionnaire (FFQ) administered to participants in the US NIH-AARP (National Institutes of Health-American Association of Retired Persons) Diet and Health Study, a cohort of 566 404 persons living in the USA and aged 50-71 years at baseline in 1995. DESIGN: The 124-item FFQ was evaluated within a measurement error model using two non-consecutive 24-hour dietary recalls (24HRs) as the reference. SETTING:Participants were from six states (California, Florida, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, North Carolina and Louisiana) and two metropolitan areas (Atlanta, Georgia and Detroit, Michigan). SUBJECTS: A subgroup of the cohort consisting of 2053 individuals. RESULTS: For the 26 nutrient constituents examined, estimated correlations with true intake (not energy-adjusted) ranged from 0.22 to 0.67, and attenuation factors ranged from 0.15 to 0.49. When adjusted for reported energy intake, performance improved; estimated correlations with true intake ranged from 0.36 to 0.76, and attenuation factors ranged from 0.24 to 0.68. These results compare favourably with those from other large prospective studies. However, previous biomarker-based studies suggest that, due to correlation of errors in FFQs and self-report reference instruments such as the 24HR, the correlations and attenuation factors observed in most calibration studies, including ours, tend to overestimate FFQ performance. CONCLUSION: The performance of the FFQ in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study, in conjunction with the study's large sample size and wide range of dietary intake, is likely to allow detection of moderate (> or =1.8) relative risks between many energy-adjusted nutrients and common cancers.
Authors: Briseis Aschebrook-Kilfoy; Mary H Ward; Gretchen L Gierach; Arthur Schatzkin; Albert R Hollenbeck; Rashmi Sinha; Amanda J Cross Journal: Eur J Cancer Prev Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 2.497
Authors: Neal D Freedman; Amanda J Cross; Katherine A McGlynn; Christian C Abnet; Yikyung Park; Albert R Hollenbeck; Arthur Schatzkin; James E Everhart; Rashmi Sinha Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2010-08-20 Impact factor: 13.506
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: Neal D Freedman; Yikyung Park; Christian C Abnet; Albert R Hollenbeck; Rashmi Sinha Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-05-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Lucy Sun; Amy F Subar; Claire Bosire; Sanford M Dawsey; Lisa L Kahle; Thea P Zimmerman; Christian C Abnet; Ruth Heller; Barry I Graubard; Michael B Cook; Jessica L Petrick Journal: J Nutr Date: 2017-07-19 Impact factor: 4.798
Authors: Qian Xiao; Rachel A Murphy; Denise K Houston; Tamara B Harris; Wong-Ho Chow; Yikyung Park Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2013-04-22 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Li Jiao; Debra T Silverman; Catherine Schairer; Anne C M Thiébaut; Albert R Hollenbeck; Michael F Leitzmann; Arthur Schatzkin; Rachael Z Stolzenberg-Solomon Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2009-03-18 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Jill Reedy; Jennifer L Lerman; Susan M Krebs-Smith; Sharon I Kirkpatrick; TusaRebecca E Pannucci; Magdalena M Wilson; Amy F Subar; Lisa L Kahle; Janet A Tooze Journal: J Acad Nutr Diet Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 4.910