BACKGROUND: Nutritional epidemiology relies largely on dietary assessment methods for the estimation of the "exposure' variables which may be related to disease risk. METHODS: This paper describes a methodological study conducted in Malmö, Sweden, to compare nutrient intake--estimated by two alternative dietary assessment methods--with a reference method consisting of 18 days of weighed food records. The two candidate methods were an extensive food frequency questionnaire with portion size to be estimated from a booklet of 120 sets of photos (method A) and a method involving the combination of a shorter questionnaire and a two-week food record (method B). RESULTS: In absolute values, both methods overestimated nutrient intake by 20-40%, with method B closer to the reference for most nutrients. Both crude and energy-adjusted correlations between A-reference and B-reference were of the order of 0.50-0.60 for energy, energy-providing nutrients and most vitamins and minerals. Correlations were in the same range for most of the 14 fatty acids considered in the analyses. Protein intake, estimated from the analyses of urinary nitrogen on 6-8 repeated 24-hour urine collections per subject, was almost identical to the reference method values. Correlation between nitrogen-derived values and dietary measurement was 0.75. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the study indicated that both methods A and B had good ranking validity compared to the reference and that in most cases the combined method (B) performed slightly better than the extensive food frequency method (A).
BACKGROUND: Nutritional epidemiology relies largely on dietary assessment methods for the estimation of the "exposure' variables which may be related to disease risk. METHODS: This paper describes a methodological study conducted in Malmö, Sweden, to compare nutrient intake--estimated by two alternative dietary assessment methods--with a reference method consisting of 18 days of weighed food records. The two candidate methods were an extensive food frequency questionnaire with portion size to be estimated from a booklet of 120 sets of photos (method A) and a method involving the combination of a shorter questionnaire and a two-week food record (method B). RESULTS: In absolute values, both methods overestimated nutrient intake by 20-40%, with method B closer to the reference for most nutrients. Both crude and energy-adjusted correlations between A-reference and B-reference were of the order of 0.50-0.60 for energy, energy-providing nutrients and most vitamins and minerals. Correlations were in the same range for most of the 14 fatty acids considered in the analyses. Protein intake, estimated from the analyses of urinary nitrogen on 6-8 repeated 24-hour urine collections per subject, was almost identical to the reference method values. Correlation between nitrogen-derived values and dietary measurement was 0.75. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the study indicated that both methods A and B had good ranking validity compared to the reference and that in most cases the combined method (B) performed slightly better than the extensive food frequency method (A).
Authors: Andreas Martinsson; Charlotte Andersson; Pontus Andell; Sasha Koul; Gunnar Engström; J Gustav Smith Journal: Eur J Epidemiol Date: 2014-06-21 Impact factor: 8.082
Authors: A Tagetti; S Bonafini; T Ohlsson; G Engström; P Almgren; P Minuz; G Smith; O Melander; C Fava Journal: J Hum Hypertens Date: 2019-01-18 Impact factor: 3.012
Authors: Franziska Jannasch; Janine Kröger; Claudia Agnoli; Aurelio Barricarte; Heiner Boeing; Valerie Cayssials; Sandra Colorado-Yohar; Christina C Dahm; Courtney Dow; Guy Fagherazzi; Paul W Franks; Heinz Freisling; Marc J Gunter; Nicola D Kerrison; Timothy J Key; Kay-Tee Khaw; Tilman Kühn; Cecilie Kyro; Francesca Romana Mancini; Olatz Mokoroa; Peter Nilsson; Kim Overvad; Domenico Palli; Salvatore Panico; Jose Ramón Quirós García; Olov Rolandsson; Carlotta Sacerdote; Mariá-José Sánchez; Mohammad Sediq Sahrai; Ruth Schübel; Ivonne Sluijs; Annemieke M W Spijkerman; Anne Tjonneland; Tammy Y N Tong; Rosario Tumino; Elio Riboli; Claudia Langenberg; Stephen J Sharp; Nita G Forouhi; Matthias B Schulze; Nicholas J Wareham Journal: J Nutr Date: 2019-06-01 Impact factor: 4.798
Authors: Martin Magnusson; Gregory D Lewis; Ulrika Ericson; Marju Orho-Melander; Bo Hedblad; Gunnar Engström; Gerd Ostling; Clary Clish; Thomas J Wang; Robert E Gerszten; Olle Melander Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2012-12-13 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Diewertje Sluik; Heiner Boeing; Kuanrong Li; Rudolf Kaaks; Nina Føns Johnsen; Anne Tjønneland; Larraitz Arriola; Aurelio Barricarte; Giovanna Masala; Sara Grioni; Rosario Tumino; Fulvio Ricceri; Amalia Mattiello; Annemieke M W Spijkerman; Daphne L van der A; Ivonne Sluijs; Paul W Franks; Peter M Nilsson; Marju Orho-Melander; Eva Fhärm; Olov Rolandsson; Elio Riboli; Dora Romaguera; Elisabete Weiderpass; Emilio Sánchez-Cantalejo; Ute Nöthlings Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2013-10-17 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Sophie Hellstrand; Filip Ottosson; Einar Smith; Louise Brunkwall; Stina Ramne; Emily Sonestedt; Peter M Nilsson; Olle Melander; Marju Orho-Melander; Ulrika Ericson Journal: Nutrients Date: 2021-05-09 Impact factor: 5.717