OBJECTIVE: To develop and evaluate a pictorial, web-based version of the NCI diet history questionnaire (Web-PDHQ). DESIGN: The Web-PDHQ and paper version of the DHQ (Paper-DHQ) were administered 4 weeks apart with 218 participants randomised to order. Dietary data from the Web-PDHQ and Paper-DHQ were validated using a randomly selected 4 d food record recording period (including a weekend day) and two randomly selected 24 h dietary recalls during the 4 weeks intervening between these two diet history administrations. SETTING: Research office in Reston, VA, USA. PARTICIPANTS: Computer-literate men and women recruited through newspaper advertisements. RESULTS: Mean correlation of energy and the twenty-five examined nutrients between the Web-PDHQ and Paper-DHQ was 0.71 and 0.51, unadjusted and energy-adjusted by the residual method, respectively. Moderate mean correlations (unadjusted 0.41 and 0.38; energy-adjusted 0.41 and 0.34) were obtained between both the Web-PDHQ and Paper-DHQ with the 4 d food record on energy and nutrients, but the correlations between the Web-PDHQ and Paper-DHQ with the 24 h recalls were modest (unadjusted 0.31 and 0.29; energy-adjusted 0.37 and 0.26). A subset of participants (n 48) completing the Web-PDHQ at the initial visit performed a retest on the same questionnaire 1 week later to determine repeatability, and the unadjusted mean correlation was 0.82. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that the Web-PDHQ has comparable repeatability and validity to the Paper-DHQ but did not improve the relationship of the DHQ to other food intake measures (e.g. food records, 24 h recall).
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To develop and evaluate a pictorial, web-based version of the NCI diet history questionnaire (Web-PDHQ). DESIGN: The Web-PDHQ and paper version of the DHQ (Paper-DHQ) were administered 4 weeks apart with 218 participants randomised to order. Dietary data from the Web-PDHQ and Paper-DHQ were validated using a randomly selected 4 d food record recording period (including a weekend day) and two randomly selected 24 h dietary recalls during the 4 weeks intervening between these two diet history administrations. SETTING: Research office in Reston, VA, USA. PARTICIPANTS: Computer-literate men and women recruited through newspaper advertisements. RESULTS: Mean correlation of energy and the twenty-five examined nutrients between the Web-PDHQ and Paper-DHQ was 0.71 and 0.51, unadjusted and energy-adjusted by the residual method, respectively. Moderate mean correlations (unadjusted 0.41 and 0.38; energy-adjusted 0.41 and 0.34) were obtained between both the Web-PDHQ and Paper-DHQ with the 4 d food record on energy and nutrients, but the correlations between the Web-PDHQ and Paper-DHQ with the 24 h recalls were modest (unadjusted 0.31 and 0.29; energy-adjusted 0.37 and 0.26). A subset of participants (n 48) completing the Web-PDHQ at the initial visit performed a retest on the same questionnaire 1 week later to determine repeatability, and the unadjusted mean correlation was 0.82. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that the Web-PDHQ has comparable repeatability and validity to the Paper-DHQ but did not improve the relationship of the DHQ to other food intake measures (e.g. food records, 24 h recall).
Authors: Frances E Thompson; Amy F Subar; Charles C Brown; Albert F Smith; Carolyn O Sharbaugh; Jared B Jobe; Beth Mittl; James T Gibson; Regina G Ziegler Journal: J Am Diet Assoc Date: 2002-02
Authors: A F Subar; F E Thompson; V Kipnis; D Midthune; P Hurwitz; S McNutt; A McIntosh; S Rosenfeld Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2001-12-15 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Laurence S Freedman; Nancy Potischman; Victor Kipnis; Douglas Midthune; Arthur Schatzkin; Frances E Thompson; Richard P Troiano; Ross Prentice; Ruth Patterson; Raymond Carroll; Amy F Subar Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2006-05-03 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Arthur Schatzkin; Victor Kipnis; Raymond J Carroll; Douglas Midthune; Amy F Subar; Sheila Bingham; Dale A Schoeller; Richard P Troiano; Laurence S Freedman Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Amy F Subar; Victor Kipnis; Richard P Troiano; Douglas Midthune; Dale A Schoeller; Sheila Bingham; Carolyn O Sharbaugh; Jillian Trabulsi; Shirley Runswick; Rachel Ballard-Barbash; Joel Sunshine; Arthur Schatzkin Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2003-07-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Deborah J Toobert; Lisa A Strycker; Sarah E Hampson; Erika Westling; Steven M Christiansen; Thomas G Hurley; James R Hébert Journal: J Am Diet Assoc Date: 2011-10
Authors: Heather S L Jim; Aasha I Hoogland; Naomi C Brownstein; Anna Barata; Adam P Dicker; Hans Knoop; Brian D Gonzalez; Randa Perkins; Dana Rollison; Scott M Gilbert; Ronica Nanda; Anders Berglund; Ross Mitchell; Peter A S Johnstone Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2020-04-20 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Alan R Kristal; Ann S Kolar; James L Fisher; Jesse J Plascak; Phyllis J Stumbo; Rick Weiss; Electra D Paskett Journal: J Acad Nutr Diet Date: 2014-01-24 Impact factor: 4.910
Authors: B Monnerie; L G Tavoularis; I Guelinckx; P Hebel; T Boisvieux; A Cousin; L Le Bellego Journal: Eur J Nutr Date: 2015-06-12 Impact factor: 5.614
Authors: Sara E Christensen; Elisabeth Möller; Stephanie E Bonn; Alexander Ploner; Olle Bälter; Lauren Lissner; Katarina Bälter Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2014-02-21 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Shaun K Riebl; Allyson C Paone; Valisa E Hedrick; Jamie M Zoellner; Paul A Estabrooks; Brenda M Davy Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2013-10-22