Garden Tabacchi1, Anna Rita Filippi1, Emanuele Amodio1, Monèm Jemni2, Antonino Bianco3, Alberto Firenze1, Caterina Mammina1. 1. 1Department of Sciences for Health Promotion and Mother Child Care 'G. D'Alessandro',University of Palermo,Via Del Vespro 133,90127 Palermo,Italy. 2. 2School of Science,University of Greenwich at Medway,Chatham Maritime,Kent,UK. 3. 3Sport and Exercise Sciences Unit,University of Palermo,Palermo,Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The present work is aimed at meta-analysing validity studies of FFQ for adolescents, to investigate their overall accuracy and variables that can affect it negatively. DESIGN: A meta-analysis of sixteen original articles was performed within the ASSO Project (Adolescents and Surveillance System in the Obesity prevention). SETTING: The articles assessed the validity of FFQ for adolescents, compared with food records or 24 h recalls, with regard to energy and nutrient intakes. SUBJECTS: Pearson's or Spearman's correlation coefficients, means/standard deviations, kappa agreement, percentiles and mean differences/limits of agreement (Bland-Altman method) were extracted. Pooled estimates were calculated and heterogeneity tested for correlation coefficients and means/standard deviations. A subgroup analysis assessed variables influencing FFQ accuracy. RESULTS: An overall fair/high correlation between FFQ and reference method was found; a good agreement, measured through the intake mean comparison for all nutrients except sugar, carotene and K, was observed. Kappa values showed fair/moderate agreement; an overall good ability to rank adolescents according to energy and nutrient intakes was evidenced by data of percentiles; absolute validity was not confirmed by mean differences/limits of agreement. Interviewer administration mode, consumption interval of the previous year/6 months and high number of food items are major contributors to heterogeneity and thus can reduce FFQ accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis shows that FFQ are accurate tools for collecting data and could be used for ranking adolescents in terms of energy and nutrient intakes. It suggests how the design and the validation of a new FFQ should be addressed.
OBJECTIVE: The present work is aimed at meta-analysing validity studies of FFQ for adolescents, to investigate their overall accuracy and variables that can affect it negatively. DESIGN: A meta-analysis of sixteen original articles was performed within the ASSO Project (Adolescents and Surveillance System in the Obesity prevention). SETTING: The articles assessed the validity of FFQ for adolescents, compared with food records or 24 h recalls, with regard to energy and nutrient intakes. SUBJECTS: Pearson's or Spearman's correlation coefficients, means/standard deviations, kappa agreement, percentiles and mean differences/limits of agreement (Bland-Altman method) were extracted. Pooled estimates were calculated and heterogeneity tested for correlation coefficients and means/standard deviations. A subgroup analysis assessed variables influencing FFQ accuracy. RESULTS: An overall fair/high correlation between FFQ and reference method was found; a good agreement, measured through the intake mean comparison for all nutrients except sugar, carotene and K, was observed. Kappa values showed fair/moderate agreement; an overall good ability to rank adolescents according to energy and nutrient intakes was evidenced by data of percentiles; absolute validity was not confirmed by mean differences/limits of agreement. Interviewer administration mode, consumption interval of the previous year/6 months and high number of food items are major contributors to heterogeneity and thus can reduce FFQ accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis shows that FFQ are accurate tools for collecting data and could be used for ranking adolescents in terms of energy and nutrient intakes. It suggests how the design and the validation of a new FFQ should be addressed.
Authors: Catherine S Berkey; Rulla M Tamimi; Walter C Willett; Bernard Rosner; Martha Hickey; Adetunji T Toriola; A Lindsay Frazier; Graham A Colditz Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2019-06-20 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Heidi T Cueto; Bjarke H Jacobsen; Anne Sofie Dam Laursen; Anders H Riis; Elizabeth E Hatch; Lauren A Wise; Ellen Trolle; Henrik Toft Sørensen; Kenneth J Rothman; Amelia K Wesselink; Sydney Willis; Benjamin R Johannesen; Ellen M Mikkelsen Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Jesus Vioque; Daniel Gimenez-Monzo; Eva Maria Navarrete-Muñoz; Manuela Garcia-de-la-Hera; Sandra Gonzalez-Palacios; Marisa Rebagliato; Ferran Ballester; Mario Murcia; Carmen Iñiguez; Fernando Granado Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-11-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Garden Tabacchi; Avery Faigenbaum; Monèm Jemni; Ewan Thomas; Laura Capranica; Antonio Palma; Joao Breda; Antonino Bianco Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2018-09-05 Impact factor: 3.390