S Whybrow1, R J Stubbs1,2, A M Johnstone1, L M O'Reilly1, Z Fuller1, M B E Livingstone3, G W Horgan4. 1. Rowett Institute of Nutrition and Health, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK. 2. Department of Life Sciences, University of Derby, Derby, UK. 3. School of Biomedical Sciences, Ulster University Coleraine Campus, Coleraine, Northern Ireland, UK. 4. Biomathematics and Statistics Scotland, Rowett Institute of Nutrition and Health, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: Comparing reported energy intakes with estimated energy requirements as multiples of basal metabolic rate (Ein:BMR) is an established method of identifying implausible food intake records. The present study aimed to examine the validity of self-reported food intakes believed to be plausible. SUBJECTS/ METHODS: One hundred and eighty men and women were provided with all food and beverages for two consecutive days in a residential laboratory setting. Subjects self-reported their food and beverage intakes using the weighed food diary method (WDR). Investigators covertly measured subjects' actual consumption over the same period. Subjects also reported intakes over four consecutive days at home. BMR was measured by indirect calorimetry. RESULTS: Average reported energy intakes were significantly lower than actual intakes (11.2 and 11.8 MJ/d, respectively, P<0.001). Two-thirds (121) of the WDR were under-reported to varying degrees. Only five of these were considered as implausible using an Ein:BMR cut-off value of 1.03*BMR. Under-reporting of food and beverage intakes, as measured by the difference between reported and actual intake, was evident at all levels of Ein;BMR. Reported energy intakes were lower still (10.2 MJ/d) while subjects were at home. CONCLUSIONS: Under-recording of self-reported food intake records was extensive but very few under-reported food intake records were identified as implausible using energy intake to BMR ratios. Under-recording was evident at all levels of energy intake.
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: Comparing reported energy intakes with estimated energy requirements as multiples of basal metabolic rate (Ein:BMR) is an established method of identifying implausible food intake records. The present study aimed to examine the validity of self-reported food intakes believed to be plausible. SUBJECTS/ METHODS: One hundred and eighty men and women were provided with all food and beverages for two consecutive days in a residential laboratory setting. Subjects self-reported their food and beverage intakes using the weighed food diary method (WDR). Investigators covertly measured subjects' actual consumption over the same period. Subjects also reported intakes over four consecutive days at home. BMR was measured by indirect calorimetry. RESULTS: Average reported energy intakes were significantly lower than actual intakes (11.2 and 11.8 MJ/d, respectively, P<0.001). Two-thirds (121) of the WDR were under-reported to varying degrees. Only five of these were considered as implausible using an Ein:BMR cut-off value of 1.03*BMR. Under-reporting of food and beverage intakes, as measured by the difference between reported and actual intake, was evident at all levels of Ein;BMR. Reported energy intakes were lower still (10.2 MJ/d) while subjects were at home. CONCLUSIONS: Under-recording of self-reported food intake records was extensive but very few under-reported food intake records were identified as implausible using energy intake to BMR ratios. Under-recording was evident at all levels of energy intake.
Authors: G R Goldberg; A E Black; S A Jebb; T J Cole; P R Murgatroyd; W A Coward; A M Prentice Journal: Eur J Clin Nutr Date: 1991-12 Impact factor: 4.016
Authors: Xin Yang; Abul Doulah; Muhammad Farooq; Jason Parton; Megan A McCrory; Janine A Higgins; Edward Sazonov Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-01-10 Impact factor: 4.379