Fiona Riordan1, Kathleen Ryan2, Ivan J Perry1, Matthias B Schulze3, Lene Frost Andersen4, Anouk Geelen5, Pieter Van't Veer5, Simone Eussen6, Pieter Dagnelie6, Nicole Wijckmans-Duysens6, Janas M Harrington1. 1. 1Department of Epidemiology and Public Health,University College Cork,Western Road,Cork,Republic of Ireland. 2. 2School of Applied Psychology,University College Cork,Cork,Republic of Ireland. 3. 3Department of Molecular Epidemiology,German Institute of Human Nutrition,Potsdam-Rehbrücke,Germany. 4. 4Department of Nutrition,Institute of Basic Medical Sciences,University of Oslo,Oslo,Norway. 5. 5Division of Human Nutrition,Wageningen University,Wageningen,The Netherlands. 6. 6Department of Epidemiology of the Faculty of Health,Medicine and Life Sciences,Maastricht University,Maastricht,The Netherlands.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Evidence suggests that health benefits are associated with consuming recommended amounts of fruits and vegetables (F&V), yet standardised assessment methods to measure F&V intake are lacking. The current review aims to identify methods to assess F&V intake among children and adults in pan-European studies and inform the development of the DEDIPAC (DEterminants of DIet and Physical Activity) toolbox of methods suitable for use in future European studies. DESIGN: A literature search was conducted using three electronic databases and by hand-searching reference lists. English-language studies of any design which assessed F&V intake were included in the review. SETTING: Studies involving two or more European countries were included in the review. SUBJECTS: Healthy, free-living children or adults. RESULTS: The review identified fifty-one pan-European studies which assessed F&V intake. The FFQ was the most commonly used (n 42), followed by 24 h recall (n 11) and diet records/diet history (n 7). Differences existed between the identified methods; for example, the number of F&V items on the FFQ and whether potatoes/legumes were classified as vegetables. In total, eight validated instruments were identified which assessed F&V intake among adults, adolescents or children. CONCLUSIONS: The current review indicates that an agreed classification of F&V is needed in order to standardise intake data more effectively between European countries. Validated methods used in pan-European populations encompassing a range of European regions were identified. These methods should be considered for use by future studies focused on evaluating intake of F&V.
OBJECTIVE: Evidence suggests that health benefits are associated with consuming recommended amounts of fruits and vegetables (F&V), yet standardised assessment methods to measure F&V intake are lacking. The current review aims to identify methods to assess F&V intake among children and adults in pan-European studies and inform the development of the DEDIPAC (DEterminants of DIet and Physical Activity) toolbox of methods suitable for use in future European studies. DESIGN: A literature search was conducted using three electronic databases and by hand-searching reference lists. English-language studies of any design which assessed F&V intake were included in the review. SETTING: Studies involving two or more European countries were included in the review. SUBJECTS: Healthy, free-living children or adults. RESULTS: The review identified fifty-one pan-European studies which assessed F&V intake. The FFQ was the most commonly used (n 42), followed by 24 h recall (n 11) and diet records/diet history (n 7). Differences existed between the identified methods; for example, the number of F&V items on the FFQ and whether potatoes/legumes were classified as vegetables. In total, eight validated instruments were identified which assessed F&V intake among adults, adolescents or children. CONCLUSIONS: The current review indicates that an agreed classification of F&V is needed in order to standardise intake data more effectively between European countries. Validated methods used in pan-European populations encompassing a range of European regions were identified. These methods should be considered for use by future studies focused on evaluating intake of F&V.
Entities:
Keywords:
DEDIPAC; Dietary assessment; Europe; Fruits and vegetables
Authors: Linda A Bush; Jayne Hutchinson; Jozef Hooson; Marisol Warthon-Medina; Neil Hancock; Katharine Greathead; Bethany Knowles; Elisa J Vargas-Garcia; Lauren E Gibson; Barrie Margetts; Sian Robinson; Andy Ness; Nisreen A Alwan; Petra A Wark; Mark Roe; Paul Finglas; Toni Steer; Polly Page; Laura Johnson; Katharine Roberts; Birdem Amoutzopoulos; Darren C Greenwood; Janet E Cade Journal: BMC Nutr Date: 2019-11-21
Authors: Fiona Riordan; Roisin McGann; Ciara Kingston; Ivan J Perry; Matthias B Schulze; Lene Frost Andersen; Anouk Geelen; Pieter Van't Veer; Simone J P M Eussen; Martien C J M Van Dongen; Nicole E G Wijckmans-Duysens; Janas M Harrington Journal: BMC Nutr Date: 2018-05-08
Authors: Johannes Brug; Hidde P van der Ploeg; Anne Loyen; Wolfgang Ahrens; Oliver Allais; Lene F Andersen; Greet Cardon; Laura Capranica; Sebastien Chastin; Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij; Marieke De Craemer; Alan Donnelly; Ulf Ekelund; Paul Finglas; Marion Flechtner-Mors; Antje Hebestreit; Thomas Kubiak; Massimo Lanza; Nanna Lien; Ciaran MacDonncha; Mario Mazzocchi; Pablo Monsivais; Marie Murphy; Mary Nicolaou; Ute Nöthlings; Donal J O'Gorman; Britta Renner; Gun Roos; Matthijs van den Berg; Matthias B Schulze; Jürgen M Steinacker; Karien Stronks; Dorothee Volkert; Jeroen Lakerveld Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2017-11-03 Impact factor: 6.457