Christine L Cleghorn1, Roger A Harrison2, Joan K Ransley3, Shan Wilkinson4, James Thomas3, Janet E Cade3. 1. 1Burden of Disease Epidemiology,Equity and Cost-Effectiveness Programme (BODE),Department of Public Health,University of Otago,23A Mein Street,Newtown,Wellington,New Zealand. 2. 2Centre for Epidemiology,Institute for Population Health,University of Manchester,Manchester,UK. 3. 3Nutritional Epidemiology Group,School of Food Science and Nutrition,University of Leeds,Leeds,UK. 4. 4Public Health,Bolton Council,Bolton,UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To devise a measure of diet quality from a short-form FFQ (SFFFQ) for population surveys. To validate the SFFFQ against an extensive FFQ and a 24 h diet recall. DESIGN: Population-based cross-sectional survey. SETTING: East Leeds and Bolton in Northern England. SUBJECTS: Adults (n 1999) were randomly selected from lists of those registered with a general practitioner in the study areas, contacted by mail and asked to complete the SFFFQ. Responders were sent a longer FFQ to complete and asked if they would take part in a telephone-based 24 h diet recall. RESULTS: Results from 826 people completing the SFFFQ, 705 completing the FFQ and forty-seven completing the diet recall were included in the analyses. The dietary quality score (DQS), based on fruit, vegetable, oily fish, non-milk extrinsic sugar and fat intakes, showed significant agreement between the SFFFQ and the FFQ (κ=0·38, P<0·001). The DQS for the SFFFQ and the diet recall did not show significant agreement (κ=0·04, P=0·312). A number of single items on the SFFFQ predicted a 'healthy' DQS when calculated from the FFQ. The odds of having a healthy diet were increased by 27 % (95 % CI 9, 49 %, P<0·001) for an increase in fruit of 1 portion/d and decreased by 67 % (95 % CI 47, 79 %, P<0·001) for an increase in crisps of 1 portion/d. CONCLUSIONS: The SFFFQ has been shown to be an effective method of assessing diet quality. It provides an important method for determining variations in diet quality within and across different populations.
OBJECTIVE: To devise a measure of diet quality from a short-form FFQ (SFFFQ) for population surveys. To validate the SFFFQ against an extensive FFQ and a 24 h diet recall. DESIGN: Population-based cross-sectional survey. SETTING: East Leeds and Bolton in Northern England. SUBJECTS: Adults (n 1999) were randomly selected from lists of those registered with a general practitioner in the study areas, contacted by mail and asked to complete the SFFFQ. Responders were sent a longer FFQ to complete and asked if they would take part in a telephone-based 24 h diet recall. RESULTS: Results from 826 people completing the SFFFQ, 705 completing the FFQ and forty-seven completing the diet recall were included in the analyses. The dietary quality score (DQS), based on fruit, vegetable, oily fish, non-milk extrinsic sugar and fat intakes, showed significant agreement between the SFFFQ and the FFQ (κ=0·38, P<0·001). The DQS for the SFFFQ and the diet recall did not show significant agreement (κ=0·04, P=0·312). A number of single items on the SFFFQ predicted a 'healthy' DQS when calculated from the FFQ. The odds of having a healthy diet were increased by 27 % (95 % CI 9, 49 %, P<0·001) for an increase in fruit of 1 portion/d and decreased by 67 % (95 % CI 47, 79 %, P<0·001) for an increase in crisps of 1 portion/d. CONCLUSIONS: The SFFFQ has been shown to be an effective method of assessing diet quality. It provides an important method for determining variations in diet quality within and across different populations.
Entities:
Keywords:
Diet quality; Diet screener; Public health; Short dietary questionnaires
Authors: Jordi Merino; Amit D Joshi; Long H Nguyen; Emily R Leeming; Mohsen Mazidi; David A Drew; Rachel Gibson; Mark S Graham; Chun-Han Lo; Joan Capdevila; Benjamin Murray; Christina Hu; Somesh Selvachandran; Alexander Hammers; Shilpa N Bhupathiraju; Shreela V Sharma; Carole Sudre; Christina M Astley; Jorge E Chavarro; Sohee Kwon; Wenjie Ma; Cristina Menni; Walter C Willett; Sebastien Ourselin; Claire J Steves; Jonathan Wolf; Paul W Franks; Timothy D Spector; Sarah Berry; Andrew T Chan Journal: Gut Date: 2021-09-06 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Mariëlle G de Rijk; Anne I Slotegraaf; Elske M Brouwer-Brolsma; Corine W M Perenboom; Edith J M Feskens; Jeanne H M de Vries Journal: Br J Nutr Date: 2021-11-15 Impact factor: 4.125
Authors: Carmela Rodríguez-Martin; Rosario Alonso-Domínguez; María C Patino-Alonso; Manuel A Gómez-Marcos; José A Maderuelo-Fernández; Carlos Martin-Cantera; Luis García-Ortiz; José I Recio-Rodríguez Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2017-04-08 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Alexia Bivoltsis; Georgina S A Trapp; Matthew Knuiman; Paula Hooper; Gina L Ambrosini Journal: Nutrients Date: 2018-04-13 Impact factor: 5.717
Authors: Tarun K Mittal; Christine L Cleghorn; Janet E Cade; Suzanne Barr; Tim Grove; Paul Bassett; David A Wood; Kornelia Kotseva Journal: Eur J Prev Cardiol Date: 2017-12-04 Impact factor: 7.804