Literature DB >> 33705267

Comparison of the Diet ID Platform to the Automated Self-administered 24-hour (ASA24) Dietary Assessment Tool for Assessment of Dietary Intake.

Gabrielle Turner-McGrievy1, Brent Hutto2, John A Bernhart1, Mary J Wilson1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Collecting multiple 24-hour recalls (24HR) can be burdensome, necessitating alternative methods to assess dietary intake in the research setting.
METHOD: This cross-sectional study compared the use of the Diet ID™ online platform with three unannounced 24HR assessed via the Automated Self-Administered 24-Hour recall (ASA24) among participants in the Nutritious Eating with Soul (NEW Soul) study. NEW Soul participants (n = 68; 100% African American, 79% female, mean age 50.7 ± 9.6 years) were randomized to follow one of two healthy soul food diets: vegan or omnivorous. For the present study, data from both groups were combined. Energy intake, dietary quality (Healthy Eating Index), and macro-/micronutrient densities per 1000 kcals, as assessed by either the averaged values of the three 24HR or the Diet ID. Descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations, and Spearman rank correlations) summarized each nutrient as measured by the Diet ID and ASA24. Bland-Altman plots were used as the main method to assess agreement between the two measures.
RESULTS: Nutrients from the Diet ID were generally higher than the 24HR except for the Healthy Eating Index (HEI) score (69.6 ± 12.2 ASA24 vs 51.1 ± 34.5 Diet ID). Diet ID reported 950 kcals higher energy intake than ASA24, with the difference being most pronounced at lower ASA24-reported energy intake. There were significant correlations among measures for HEI score, protein, carbohydrates, cholesterol, potassium, copper, thiamin, and vitamins B12 and E. There was higher reporting of nutrients using Diet ID compared to the 24HR. Diet ID is a rapid way to assess dietary intake.
CONCLUSIONS: Future studies should consider comparing these two methods with objective assessments of energy and nutrient intake and using multiple instruments to ensure that the strengths of all methods are included.

Entities:  

Keywords:  24-hour dietary recall; Diet assessment; diet; energy intake; food frequency questionnaire

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33705267      PMCID: PMC8634522          DOI: 10.1080/07315724.2021.1887775

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Nutr Assoc        ISSN: 2769-7061


  41 in total

1.  Underreporting of energy intake in Brazilian women varies according to dietary assessment: a cross-sectional study using doubly labeled water.

Authors:  Fernanda B Scagliusi; Eduardo Ferriolli; Karina Pfrimer; Cibele Laureano; Caroline Sanita Cunha; Bruno Gualano; Barbara Hatzlhoffer Lourenço; Antonio Herbert Lancha
Journal:  J Am Diet Assoc       Date:  2008-12

2.  Pooled results from 5 validation studies of dietary self-report instruments using recovery biomarkers for energy and protein intake.

Authors:  Laurence S Freedman; John M Commins; James E Moler; Lenore Arab; David J Baer; Victor Kipnis; Douglas Midthune; Alanna J Moshfegh; Marian L Neuhouser; Ross L Prentice; Arthur Schatzkin; Donna Spiegelman; Amy F Subar; Lesley F Tinker; Walter Willett
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2014-06-10       Impact factor: 4.897

Review 3.  Measurement Errors in Dietary Assessment Using Self-Reported 24-Hour Recalls in Low-Income Countries and Strategies for Their Prevention.

Authors:  Rosalind S Gibson; U Ruth Charrondiere; Winnie Bell
Journal:  Adv Nutr       Date:  2017-11-15       Impact factor: 8.701

4.  Performance of the Automated Self-Administered 24-hour Recall relative to a measure of true intakes and to an interviewer-administered 24-h recall.

Authors:  Sharon I Kirkpatrick; Amy F Subar; Deirdre Douglass; Thea P Zimmerman; Frances E Thompson; Lisa L Kahle; Stephanie M George; Kevin W Dodd; Nancy Potischman
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  2014-04-30       Impact factor: 7.045

5.  Comparison of Interviewer-Administered and Automated Self-Administered 24-Hour Dietary Recalls in 3 Diverse Integrated Health Systems.

Authors:  Frances E Thompson; Sujata Dixit-Joshi; Nancy Potischman; Kevin W Dodd; Sharon I Kirkpatrick; Lawrence H Kushi; Gwen L Alexander; Laura A Coleman; Thea P Zimmerman; Maria E Sundaram; Heather A Clancy; Michelle Groesbeck; Deirdre Douglass; Stephanie M George; TusaRebecca E Schap; Amy F Subar
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2015-05-10       Impact factor: 4.897

6.  An easy approach to calculating estimated energy requirements.

Authors:  Shirley Gerrior; Wenyen Juan; Peter Basiotis
Journal:  Prev Chronic Dis       Date:  2006-09-15       Impact factor: 2.830

Review 7.  Dietary assessment methods in epidemiological research: current state of the art and future prospects.

Authors:  Androniki Naska; Areti Lagiou; Pagona Lagiou
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2017-06-16

Review 8.  Dietary assessment methods in epidemiologic studies.

Authors:  Jee-Seon Shim; Kyungwon Oh; Hyeon Chang Kim
Journal:  Epidemiol Health       Date:  2014-07-22

9.  Examining Plausibility of Self-Reported Energy Intake Data: Considerations for Method Selection.

Authors:  Jinan C Banna; Megan A McCrory; Marie Kainoa Fialkowski; Carol Boushey
Journal:  Front Nutr       Date:  2017-09-25

10.  Validity and reliability of an online self-report 24-h dietary recall method (Intake24): a doubly labelled water study and repeated-measures analysis.

Authors:  Emma Foster; Clement Lee; Fumiaki Imamura; Stefanie E Hollidge; Kate L Westgate; Michelle C Venables; Ivan Poliakov; Maisie K Rowland; Timur Osadchiy; Jennifer C Bradley; Emma L Simpson; Ashley J Adamson; Patrick Olivier; Nick Wareham; Nita G Forouhi; Soren Brage
Journal:  J Nutr Sci       Date:  2019-08-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.