論文

査読有り
2017年7月

Comparison of weighed food record procedures for the reference methods in two validation studies of food frequency questionnaires

JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
  • Yuri Ishii
  • Junko Ishihara
  • Ribeka Takachi
  • Yurie Shinozawa
  • Nahomi Imaeda
  • Chiho Goto
  • Kenji Wakai
  • Toshiaki Takahashi
  • Hiroyasu Iso
  • Kazutoshi Nakamura
  • Junta Tanaka
  • Taichi Shimazu
  • Taiki Yamaji
  • Shizuka Sasazuki
  • Norie Sawada
  • Motoki Iwasaki
  • Haruo Mikami
  • Kiyonori Kuriki
  • Mariko Naito
  • Naoko Okamoto
  • Fumi Kondo
  • Satoyo Hosono
  • Naoko Miyagawa
  • Etsuko Ozaki
  • Sakurako Katsuura-Kamano
  • Keizo Ohnaka
  • Hinako Nanri
  • Noriko Tsunematsu-Nakahata
  • Takamasa Kayama
  • Ayako Kurihara
  • Shiomi Kojima
  • Hideo Tanaka
  • Shoichiro Tsugane
  • 全て表示

27
7
開始ページ
331
終了ページ
337
記述言語
英語
掲載種別
研究論文(学術雑誌)
DOI
10.1016/j.je.2016.08.008
出版者・発行元
ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC

Background: Although open-ended dietary assessment methods, such as weighed food records (WFRs), are generally considered to be comparable, differences between procedures may influence outcome when WFRs are conducted independently. In this paper, we assess the procedures of WFRs in two studies to describe their dietary assessment procedures and compare the subsequent outcomes.
Methods: WFRs of 12 days (3 days for four seasons) were conducted as reference methods for intake data, in accordance with the study protocol, among a subsample of participants of two large cohort studies. We compared the WFR procedures descriptively. We also compared some dietary intake variables, such as the frequency of foods and dishes and contributing foods, to determine whether there were differences in the portion size distribution and intra-and inter-individual variation in nutrient intakes caused by the difference in procedures.
Results: General procedures of the dietary records were conducted in accordance with the National Health and Nutrition Survey and were the same for both studies. Differences were seen in 1) selection of multiple days (non-consecutive days versus consecutive days); and 2) survey sheet recording method (individual versus family participation). However, the foods contributing to intake of energy and selected nutrients, the portion size distribution, and intra-and inter-individual variation in nutrient intakes were similar between the two studies.
Conclusion: Our comparison of WFR procedures in two independent studies revealed several differences. Notwithstanding these procedural differences, however, the subsequent outcomes were similar. (C) 2017 The Authors. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of The Japan Epidemiological Association.

リンク情報
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.je.2016.08.008
PubMed
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28302344
Web of Science
https://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=JSTA_CEL&SrcApp=J_Gate_JST&DestLinkType=FullRecord&KeyUT=WOS:000406116400006&DestApp=WOS_CPL
ID情報
  • DOI : 10.1016/j.je.2016.08.008
  • ISSN : 0917-5040
  • PubMed ID : 28302344
  • Web of Science ID : WOS:000406116400006

エクスポート
BibTeX RIS