M Kiely1,2, A Collins1, A J Lucey1, R Andersen3, K D Cashman1,4, Á Hennessy1. 1. Vitamin D Research Group, School of Food and Nutritional Sciences, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland. 2. The Irish Centre for Fetal and Neonatal Translational Research (Infant), University College Cork, Cork, Ireland. 3. National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark. 4. Department of Medicine, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A well-designed, validated quantitative food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) could offer an efficient and cost-effective method for assessing habitual vitamin D intake. The present study aimed to describe the development, validation and implementation of a vitamin D FFQ. METHODS: National food consumption survey data obtained from Irish adults (18-64 years) were used to identify foods that contribute 95% of vitamin D intake. A winter-based validation study was carried out for the resulting FFQ in 120 females, including 98 women [mean (SD) 65.0 (7.3) years] and 22 girls [12.2 (0.8) years], using a 14-day diet history (DH) as a comparator. Serum 25(OH)D concentrations were analysed. Validity coefficients were calculated using the method of triads. Cross-classification and Bland-Altman analysis were also performed. RESULTS: Median (interquartile range) vitamin D intakes (including the contribution from nutritional supplements) were 5.4 (3.7) and 3.7 (5.9) μg day(-1) from the FFQ and DH, respectively and intakes of vitamin D from food sources were 3.6 (3.1) and 2.4 (2.2) μg day(-1) . The FFQ and DH classified 86% and 87% of individuals into the same and adjacent thirds of wintertime serum 25(OH)D status, respectively. There was a strong association (r = 0.71, P < 0.0001) and no significant systematic or proportional bias observed for the difference between estimates from the FFQ and DH. The validity coefficient for the FFQ was 0.92 (95% confidence interval = 0.80-0.97). Repeatability analysis (n = 56) performed 6-12 months later showed no significant difference in estimates of vitamin D between administrations. CONCLUSIONS: The data obtained in the present study indicate high validity and good reproducibility of a short, interviewer-administered FFQ for vitamin D.
BACKGROUND: A well-designed, validated quantitative food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) could offer an efficient and cost-effective method for assessing habitual vitamin D intake. The present study aimed to describe the development, validation and implementation of a vitamin DFFQ. METHODS: National food consumption survey data obtained from Irish adults (18-64 years) were used to identify foods that contribute 95% of vitamin D intake. A winter-based validation study was carried out for the resulting FFQ in 120 females, including 98 women [mean (SD) 65.0 (7.3) years] and 22 girls [12.2 (0.8) years], using a 14-day diet history (DH) as a comparator. Serum 25(OH)D concentrations were analysed. Validity coefficients were calculated using the method of triads. Cross-classification and Bland-Altman analysis were also performed. RESULTS: Median (interquartile range) vitamin D intakes (including the contribution from nutritional supplements) were 5.4 (3.7) and 3.7 (5.9) μg day(-1) from the FFQ and DH, respectively and intakes of vitamin D from food sources were 3.6 (3.1) and 2.4 (2.2) μg day(-1) . The FFQ and DH classified 86% and 87% of individuals into the same and adjacent thirds of wintertime serum 25(OH)D status, respectively. There was a strong association (r = 0.71, P < 0.0001) and no significant systematic or proportional bias observed for the difference between estimates from the FFQ and DH. The validity coefficient for the FFQ was 0.92 (95% confidence interval = 0.80-0.97). Repeatability analysis (n = 56) performed 6-12 months later showed no significant difference in estimates of vitamin D between administrations. CONCLUSIONS: The data obtained in the present study indicate high validity and good reproducibility of a short, interviewer-administered FFQ for vitamin D.
Authors: Line Thams; Lars G Hvid; Nanna G Stounbjerg; Jan C Brønd; Christian Mølgaard; Camilla T Damsgaard; Mette Hansen Journal: Eur J Nutr Date: 2022-05-28 Impact factor: 4.865
Authors: Karen M O'Callaghan; Áine Hennessy; George L J Hull; Karina Healy; Christian Ritz; Louise C Kenny; Kevin D Cashman; Mairead E Kiely Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2018-07-01 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Andrea Hemmingway; Karen M O'Callaghan; Áine Hennessy; George L J Hull; Kevin D Cashman; Mairead E Kiely Journal: Nutrients Date: 2018-07-17 Impact factor: 5.717
Authors: Guiomar Masip; Anna Keski-Rahkonen; Kirsi H Pietiläinen; Urho M Kujala; Mirva Rottensteiner; Karoliina Väisänen; Jaakko Kaprio; Leonie H Bogl Journal: Nutrients Date: 2019-10-23 Impact factor: 5.717
Authors: D Enette Larson-Meyer; Corey S Douglas; Joi J Thomas; Evan C Johnson; Jacqueline N Barcal; Jenna E Heller; Bruce W Hollis; Tanya M Halliday Journal: Nutrients Date: 2019-11-11 Impact factor: 5.717