Literature DB >> 17672921

A comparison of four dietary assessment methods in materially deprived households in England.

Bridget Holmes1, Katie Dick, Michael Nelson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Low-income households in the UK concentrate factors associated with poor record-keeping such as lower literacy, numeracy and English language skills. The present study aimed to (1) compare the validity and acceptability of three dietary survey methods against appropriate reference measures and (2) identify a method which was both valid and acceptable in low-income households.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional design comparing three 4-day dietary survey methods (multiple-pass 24-hour recall, food checklist and semi-weighed method) against a 4-day weighed inventory and other reference measures within subjects.
SETTING: London, UK, 2001.
SUBJECTS: Low-income households were selected using a doorstep screening questionnaire in 18 of the 60 most deprived neighbourhoods in London. Results are based on 384 respondents (159 males, 225 females) aged 2-90 years in 240 households. Respondents were mainly White (48%), Black or Black British (31%) or Asian or Asian British (9%).
RESULTS: The dietary survey method preferred by interviewers was the 24-hour recall. Most respondents preferred the food checklist. Compared with the weighed inventory, repeat 24-hour recalls and the food checklist yielded higher estimates of energy and nutrient intakes. The semi-weighed method was least liked and yielded the lowest estimates of intake.
CONCLUSIONS: Based partly on evidence presented here and partly on evidence to be presented in later publications, four multiple-pass 24-hour recalls were recommended as the most appropriate method for a national study of diet and nutrition in low-income households in the UK.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17672921     DOI: 10.1017/S1368980007000559

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Public Health Nutr        ISSN: 1368-9800            Impact factor:   4.022


  25 in total

1.  Are diet diaries of value in recording dietary intake of sugars? A retrospective analysis of completion rates and information quality.

Authors:  A Arheiam; S Albadri; S Brown; G Burnside; S Higham; R Harris
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  2016-11-04       Impact factor: 1.626

2.  Repeated 24-hour recalls versus dietary records for estimating nutrient intakes in a national food consumption survey.

Authors:  Willem De Keyzer; Inge Huybrechts; Veerle De Vriendt; Stefanie Vandevijvere; Nadia Slimani; Herman Van Oyen; Stefaan De Henauw
Journal:  Food Nutr Res       Date:  2011-11-11       Impact factor: 3.894

Review 3.  Water intake: validity of population assessment and recommendations.

Authors:  Joan Gandy
Journal:  Eur J Nutr       Date:  2015-06-06       Impact factor: 5.614

4.  Limitations of 24-hour Recall Method: Micronutrient Intake and the Presence of the Metabolic Syndrome.

Authors:  Sunil Kumar Raina
Journal:  N Am J Med Sci       Date:  2013-08

5.  Does the presence of cardiovascular disease risk factors or established disease influence the dietary intake of affected adults and their children residing in the same household? A secondary analysis of the Australian Health Survey (2011-2013).

Authors:  Jolene Thomas; Lily Chan; Amanda Wray; Jacqueline Miller; Kaye Mehta; Alison Yaxley; Kacie Dickinson; Louisa Matwiejczyk; Kathryn Jackson; Michelle Miller
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2017-06-05       Impact factor: 2.298

6.  An explorative cross-sectional study examining self-reported health and nutritional status of disadvantaged people using food banks in Germany.

Authors:  Julia Depa; Carolin Hilzendegen; Peter Tinnemann; Nanette Stroebele-Benschop
Journal:  Int J Equity Health       Date:  2015-11-24

7.  Comparison of INTAKE24 (an Online 24-h Dietary Recall Tool) with Interviewer-Led 24-h Recall in 11-24 Year-Old.

Authors:  Jennifer Bradley; Emma Simpson; Ivan Poliakov; John N S Matthews; Patrick Olivier; Ashley J Adamson; Emma Foster
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2016-06-09       Impact factor: 5.717

8.  Development of food photographs for use with children aged 18 months to 16 years: Comparison against weighed food diaries - The Young Person's Food Atlas (UK).

Authors:  Emma Foster; Adrian Hawkins; Karen L Barton; Elaine Stamp; John N S Matthews; Ashley J Adamson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-02-15       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  National nutrition surveys in Europe: a review on the current status in the 53 countries of the WHO European region.

Authors:  Holly L Rippin; Jayne Hutchinson; Charlotte E L Evans; Jo Jewell; Joao J Breda; Janet E Cade
Journal:  Food Nutr Res       Date:  2018-04-16       Impact factor: 3.894

10.  Study protocol for the 'HelpMeDoIt!' randomised controlled feasibility trial: an app, web and social support-based weight loss intervention for adults with obesity.

Authors:  Lynsay Matthews; Juliana Pugmire; Laurence Moore; Mark Kelson; Alex McConnachie; Emma McIntosh; Sarah Morgan-Trimmer; Simon Murphy; Kathryn Hughes; Elinor Coulman; Olga Utkina-Macaskill; Sharon Anne Simpson
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-10-25       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.