Literature DB >> 30121379

Controversy and debate: Memory-Based Methods Paper 1: the fatal flaws of food frequency questionnaires and other memory-based dietary assessment methods.

Edward Archer1, Michael L Marlow2, Carl J Lavie3.   

Abstract

There is an escalating debate over the value and validity of self-reported dietary intake as estimated by Food Frequency Questionnaires and other forms of memory-based dietary assessment methods. Proponents argue that despite limitations, memory-based methods provide valid and valuable information about consumed foods and beverages and therefore can be used to assess diet-disease relations. In fact, over the past 60 years, thousands of memory-based dietary research reports were used to inform public policy and establish the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Yet, despite this impressive history, our position is that memory-based dietary assessment methods are invalid and inadmissible for scientific research and therefore cannot be used in evidence-based policy making. Herein, we present the empirical evidence and theoretic and philosophic perspectives that render data derived from memory-based methods both fatally flawed and pseudoscientific. First, the use of memory-based methods is founded upon two inter-related logical fallacies: a category error and reification. Second, human memory and recall are not valid instruments for scientific data collection. Third, in standard epidemiologic contexts, the measurement errors associated with self-reported data are nonfalsifiable because there is no way to ascertain if the reported foods and beverages match the respondent's actual consumption. Fourth, the assignment of nutrient and energy values to self-reported intake (i.e., the pseudoquantification of anecdotal data) is impermissible and violates the foundational tenets of measurement theory. Fifth, the proxy estimates created via pseudoquantification are often physiologically implausible and have little relation to actual nutrient and energy consumption. Finally, investigators engendered a fictional discourse on the health effects of dietary sugar, salt, fat and cholesterol when they failed to cite contrary evidence or address decades of research demonstrating the fatal measurement, analytic, and inferential flaws of memory-based dietary assessment methods.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Category error; Diet; Epidemiology; Implausible; Measurement; Nutrition

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30121379     DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.08.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  26 in total

Review 1.  Milk and Dairy Product Consumption and Cardiovascular Diseases: An Overview of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

Authors:  Javier Fontecha; Maria Visitación Calvo; Manuela Juarez; Angel Gil; Vicente Martínez-Vizcaino
Journal:  Adv Nutr       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 8.701

Review 2.  Memory and eating: A bidirectional relationship implicated in obesity.

Authors:  Marise B Parent; Suzanne Higgs; Lucy G Cheke; Scott E Kanoski
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2021-11-20       Impact factor: 8.989

3.  Repeated exposure to epigallocatechin gallate solution or water alters bitterness intensity and salivary protein profile.

Authors:  Lissa A Davis; Cordelia A Running
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2021-10-14

Review 4.  A Role for Data Science in Precision Nutrition and Early Brain Development.

Authors:  Sarah U Morton; Brian J Leyshon; Eleonora Tamilia; Rutvi Vyas; Michaela Sisitsky; Imran Ladha; John B Lasekan; Matthew J Kuchan; P Ellen Grant; Yangming Ou
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2022-06-23       Impact factor: 5.435

5.  Spanish Version of the Plymouth Sensory Imagery Questionnaire.

Authors:  María José Pérez-Fabello; Alfredo Campos
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2020-05-20

6.  Obese individuals do not underreport dietary intake to a greater extent than nonobese individuals when data are allometrically-scaled.

Authors:  Sally P Waterworth; Catherine J Kerr; Christopher J McManus; Rianne Costello; Gavin R H Sandercock
Journal:  Am J Hum Biol       Date:  2022-03-08       Impact factor: 2.947

7.  Wearable Technology to Quantify the Nutritional Intake of Adults: Validation Study.

Authors:  Sarah M Dimitratos; J Bruce German; Sara E Schaefer
Journal:  JMIR Mhealth Uhealth       Date:  2020-07-22       Impact factor: 4.773

8.  Comparing Interviewer-Administered and Web-Based Food Frequency Questionnaires to Predict Energy Requirements in Adults.

Authors:  Didier Brassard; Simone Lemieux; Amélie Charest; Annie Lapointe; Patrick Couture; Marie-Ève Labonté; Benoît Lamarche
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2018-09-12       Impact factor: 5.717

9.  The carbon isotope ratios of nonessential amino acids identify sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumers in a 12-wk inpatient feeding study of 32 men with varying SSB and meat exposures.

Authors:  Jessica J Johnson; Pamela A Shaw; Eric J Oh; Matthew J Wooller; Sean Merriman; Hee Young Yun; Thomas Larsen; Jonathan Krakoff; Susanne B Votruba; Diane M O'Brien
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  2021-05-08       Impact factor: 7.045

10.  The Failure to Measure Dietary Intake Engendered a Fictional Discourse on Diet-Disease Relations.

Authors:  Edward Archer; Carl J Lavie; James O Hill
Journal:  Front Nutr       Date:  2018-11-13
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.