Clare E Collins1, May M Boggess2, Jane F Watson3, Maya Guest4, Kerith Duncanson3, Kristine Pezdirc3, Megan Rollo3, Melinda J Hutchesson3, Tracy L Burrows3. 1. School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; Priority Research Centre in Physical Activity and Nutrition, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia. Electronic address: clare.collins@newcastle.edu.au. 2. School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA. 3. School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; Priority Research Centre in Physical Activity and Nutrition, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia. 4. School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Food frequency questionnaires (FFQ) are used in epidemiological studies to investigate the relationship between diet and disease. There is a need for a valid and reliable adult FFQ with a contemporary food list in Australia. AIMS: To evaluate the reproducibility and comparative validity of the Australian Eating Survey (AES) FFQ in adults compared to weighed food records (WFRs). METHODS: Two rounds of AES and three-day WFRs were conducted in 97 adults (31 males, median age and BMI for males of 44.9 years, 26.2 kg/m(2), females 41.3 years, 24.0 kg/m(2). Reproducibility was assessed over six months using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and comparative validity was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) estimated by fitting a mixed effects model for each nutrient to account for age, sex and BMI to allow estimation of between and within person variance. RESULTS: Reproducibility was found to be good for both WFR and FFQ since there were no significant differences between round 1 and 2 administrations. For comparative validity, FFQ ICCs were at least as large as those for WFR. The ICC of the WFR-FFQ difference for total energy intake was 0.6 (95% CI 0.43, 0.77) and the median ICC for all nutrients was 0.47, with all ICCs between 0.15 (%E from saturated fat) and 0.7 (g/day sugars). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to WFR the AES FFQ is suitable for reliably estimating the dietary intakes of Australian adults across a wide range of nutrients.
BACKGROUND: Food frequency questionnaires (FFQ) are used in epidemiological studies to investigate the relationship between diet and disease. There is a need for a valid and reliable adult FFQ with a contemporary food list in Australia. AIMS: To evaluate the reproducibility and comparative validity of the Australian Eating Survey (AES) FFQ in adults compared to weighed food records (WFRs). METHODS: Two rounds of AES and three-day WFRs were conducted in 97 adults (31 males, median age and BMI for males of 44.9 years, 26.2 kg/m(2), females 41.3 years, 24.0 kg/m(2). Reproducibility was assessed over six months using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and comparative validity was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) estimated by fitting a mixed effects model for each nutrient to account for age, sex and BMI to allow estimation of between and within person variance. RESULTS: Reproducibility was found to be good for both WFR and FFQ since there were no significant differences between round 1 and 2 administrations. For comparative validity, FFQ ICCs were at least as large as those for WFR. The ICC of the WFR-FFQ difference for total energy intake was 0.6 (95% CI 0.43, 0.77) and the median ICC for all nutrients was 0.47, with all ICCs between 0.15 (%E from saturated fat) and 0.7 (g/day sugars). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to WFR the AES FFQ is suitable for reliably estimating the dietary intakes of Australian adults across a wide range of nutrients.
Authors: Francis M Borges; Thaís O de Paula; Marjorie R A Sarmiento; Maycon G de Oliveira; Maria L M Pereira; Isabela V Toledo; Thiago C Nascimento; Alessandra B Ferreira-Machado; Vânia L Silva; Cláudio G Diniz Journal: Curr Microbiol Date: 2018-01-24 Impact factor: 2.188
Authors: Jaimon T Kelly; Marguerite Conley; Tammy Hoffmann; Jonathan C Craig; Allison Tong; Dianne P Reidlinger; Marina M Reeves; Kirsten Howard; Rathika Krishnasamy; Jagadeesh Kurtkoti; Suetonia C Palmer; David W Johnson; Katrina L Campbell Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2020-02-28 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Peter J Kelly; Amanda L Baker; Frank P Deane; Robin Callister; Clare E Collins; Christopher Oldmeadow; John R Attia; Camilla J Townsend; Isabella Ingram; Gerard Byrne; Carol A Keane Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2015-05-03 Impact factor: 3.295