Dataset Information

Assessing Dietary Diversity in Pregnant Women: Relative Validity of the List-Based and Open Recall Methods.

ABSTRACT: Background:The Minimum Dietary Diversity for Women (MMD-W) was validated as a proxy of micronutrient adequacy for nonpregnant women, with proposed data collection being either a list-based or a qualitative open recall method. Few studies have compared the performance of these 2 methods. Objectives:We compared performance in predicting micronutrient adequacy of food group indicators (FGIs) measured by the list-based and the quantitative open recall methods using varying quantity cut-offs. We also examined the agreement between list-based and open recall FGIs. Methods:Data were collected in Bangladesh (n = 600 pregnant women) and India (n = 655). The performance of different indicators to predict micronutrient adequacy was compared using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Correlations between list-based and open recall FGIs were calculated using Spearman's rank test; agreement was assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and kappa statistics. Food groups that were most often misreported by the list-based method were identified. Results:There were no statistically significant differences in ROC curves between list-based and open recall FGIs in either country. In Bangladesh, correlations between list-based and open recall FGIs varied between 0.6 and 0.8; ICC values were 0.43-0.75; kappa values were 0.51-0.53 when using a cut-off of any quantity or 15 g for open recall, but were lower (k = 0.24) with the cut-off of 1 portion. In India, these values were lower: ?0.4 for correlation, 0.32-0.37 for ICCs, and 0.17-0.22 for kappas. Food groups most susceptible to misreporting using the list-based method were beans/peas in Bangladesh and other vegetables in India. Conclusions:Our study provides initial support for the use of list-based questionnaires in assessing food group diversity or prevalence of MDD-W in pregnant women. Additional and context-specific work may be required to understand the potential of simple methodologies to assess consumption of specific food groups. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02745249 (Bangladesh) and NCT03378141 (India).

SUBMITTER: Nguyen PH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7101484 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Assessing Dietary Diversity in Pregnant Women: Relative Validity of the List-Based and Open Recall Methods.

Nguyen Phuong Hong PH Martin-Prevel Yves Y Moursi Mourad M Tran Lan Mai LM Menon Purnima P Ruel Marie T MT Arimond Mary M

Current developments in nutrition 20191118 1

<h4>Background</h4>The Minimum Dietary Diversity for Women (MMD-W) was validated as a proxy of micronutrient adequacy for nonpregnant women, with proposed data collection being either a list-based or a qualitative open recall method. Few studies have compared the performance of these 2 methods.<h4>Objectives</h4>We compared performance in predicting micronutrient adequacy of food group indicators (FGIs) measured by the list-based and the quantitative open recall methods using varying quantity cu ...[more]

PMID: 32258987

Similar Datasets

Project description:Minimum dietary diversity for women of reproductive age (MDD-W) was validated as a population-level proxy of micronutrient adequacy, with indicator data collection proposed as either list-based or open recall. No study has assessed the validity of these two non-quantitative proxy methods against weighed food records (WFR). We assessed the measurement agreement of list-based and open recall methods as compared to WFR (i.e., reference method of individual quantitative dietary assessment) for achieving MDD-W and an ordinal food group diversity score. Applying a non-inferiority design, data were collected from non-pregnant women of reproductive age in Cambodia (n = 430), Ethiopia (n = 431), and Zambia (n = 476). For the pooled sample (n = 1337), proportions achieving MDD-W from both proxy methods were compared to WFR proportion by McNemar's chi-square tests, Cohen's kappa, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Ordinal food group diversity (0-10) was compared by Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank tests, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), and weighted kappa. MDD-W food groups that were most frequently misreported (i.e., type I and II errors) by the proxy methods were determined. Our findings indicate statistically significant differences in proportions achieving MDD-W, ordinal food group diversity scores, and ROC curves between both proxy methods and WFR (p < 0.001). List-based and open recall methods overreported women achieving MDD-W by 16 and 10 percentage points, respectively, as compared to WFR (proportion achieving MDD-W: 30%). ICC values between list-based or open recall and WFR were 0.50 and 0.55, respectively. Simple and weighted kappa values both indicated moderate agreement between list-based or open recall against WFR. Food groups most likely to be misreported using proxy methods were beans and peas, dark green leafy vegetables, vitamin A-rich fruit and vegetables, and other fruits. Our study provides statistical evidence for overreporting of both list-based and open recall methods for assessing prevalence of MDD-W or ordinal food group diversity score in women of reproductive age in low- and middle-income countries. Operationalizing MDD-W through qualitative recall methods should consider potential trade-offs between accuracy and simplicity.

Project description:BackgroundAccurate dietary assessment is key to understanding nutrition-related outcomes and for estimating the dietary change in nutrition-based interventions. When researching the habitual consumption of selected food groups, it is essential to be aware of factors that could possibly affect reporting accuracy.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the relative validity of the current-day dietary recall, a method based on a smartphone app called electronic 12-hour dietary recall (e-12HR), to categorize individuals according to habitual intake, in the whole sample of adults and in different strata thereof.MethodsUniversity students and employees over 18 years recorded the consumption of 10 selected groups of food using e-12HR during 28 consecutive days. During this period, they also completed 4 dietary records. Once the period was finished, the subjects then completed a food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) and a usability-rating questionnaire for e-12HR. The food group intakes estimated by the e-12HR app, the dietary records, and the FFQ were categorized into sextiles: less than once a week, once or twice a week, 3-4 times a week, 5-6 times a week, once or twice a day, and 3 or more times a day. The 10 selected groups with e-12HR were compared with 4 dietary records and an FFQ reference method, in the whole sample and in different strata thereof: age (years): <25 and ≥25; gender: females and males; occupation: students and employees; smoking: no and yes; physical activity (minutes/week): ≥150 and <150; and body mass index (kg/m2): <25 and ≥25. The association between the different methods was assessed using Spearman correlation coefficient (SCC). Cross-classification and kappa statistic were used as a measure of agreement between the different methods.ResultsIn total, 203 participants completed the study (56.7% [115/203] women, and 43.3% [88/203] men). For all food groups and all participants, the mean SCC for e-12HR versus FFQ was 0.67 (≥0.62 for all strata). On average, 50.7% of participants were classified into the same category (≥47.0% for all strata) and 90.2% within the nearest category (≥88.6% for all strata). Mean weighted kappa was 0.49 (≥0.44 for all strata). For e-12HR versus RDs, mean SCC was 0.65 (≥0.57 for all strata). On average, 50.0% of participants were classified into the same category (≥47.0% for all strata) and 88.2% within the nearest category (≥86.1% for all strata). Mean weighted kappa was 0.50 (≥0.44 for all strata).ConclusionsThe results indicate that e-12HR generated categories of dietary intake highly comparable with the 2 reference methods in the whole sample and in different strata thereof. The inclusion of photographs to facilitate estimation of the servings consumed generated correlation/agreement data between e-12HR and the FFQ that were similar to a previous study using an older version of the app, which did not include photographs.

Project description:The Norwegian food-based dietary guidelines (FBDG) aim at reducing the risk of developing chronic diseases and promote overall health. We studied the effect of the Norwegian FBDG in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. There is a need for a time-efficient dietary assessment tool measuring adherence to these guidelines in patients treated for dietary dependent cancer, such as CRC patients. To evaluate a new short food frequency questionnaire (NORDIET-FFQ), developed to estimate adherence to the Norwegian FBDG among CRC patients. Eighty-one CRC patients from both study groups in the Norwegian Dietary Guidelines and Colorectal Cancer Survival study, an ongoing dietary intervention, completed both the short 63-item NORDIET-FFQ and a 7-day weighed food record. The NORDIET-FFQ was on group level able to estimate intakes of fruits, vegetables, unsalted nuts, fish, fatty fish, high fat dairy products, unprocessed meat, processed meat, red meat, water, sugar-rich beverages, alcoholic drinks, and sugar- and fat-rich foods. Ranking of individuals according to intake was good (r = 0.31-0.74) for fruits and vegetables, fruits, unsalted nuts, whole grain products, sugar-rich cereals, fish, fatty fish, dairy products, red meat, water, sugar-rich beverages, alcoholic beverages, and sugar- and fat-rich foods. The NORDIET-FFQ was able to identify the individuals who did not fulfil the recommendations of fruits, vegetables, unsalted nuts, whole grains, low-fat dairy products, processed meat, water, alcoholic beverages, and sugar- and fat-rich foods (sensitivity: 67-93%). The NORDIET-FFQ showed good ability in to estimate intakes of plant-based foods, fish, dairy products, meat, and energy-dense foods; adequate ranking of individuals according to intake of most recommendations except for unprocessed meat, processed meat, and vegetables; and importantly a good ability to identify those patients in need of dietary counselling for foods that are known to modulate the risk of CRC. National Institutes of Health ClinicalTrials.gov; Identifier: NCT01570010.

Project description:BackgroundThe Nova classification system categorizes foods into 4 processing levels, including ultraprocessed foods (UPFs). Consumption of UPFs is extensive in the United States, and high UPF consumption is associated with chronic disease risk. A reliable and valid method to Nova-categorize foods would advance understanding of UPF consumption and its relationship to health outcomes.ObjectivesTest the reliability and validity of training coders and assigning Nova categories to individual foods collected via 24-h dietary recalls.DesignA secondary analysis of 24-h dietary recalls from 610 children who participated in a randomized controlled trial and were 3-5 y old at baseline was conducted. The Nutrition Data System for Research (NDSR) software was used to collect 2-3 dietary recalls at baseline and yearly for 3 y. Trained and certified coder pairs independently categorized foods into one of 4 Nova categories (minimally processed, processed culinary ingredients, processed, and ultraprocessed). Interrater reliability was assessed by percent concordance between coder pairs and by Cohen's κ coefficient. Construct validity was evaluated by comparing the average daily macronutrient content of foods between Nova categories.ResultsIn 5546 valid recall days, 3099 unique foods were categorized: minimally processed (18%), processed culinary ingredients (0.4%), processed (15%), and ultraprocessed (67%). Coder concordance = 88.3%, and κ coefficient = 0.75. Descriptive comparisons of macronutrient content across 66,531 diet recall food entries were consistent with expectations. On average, UPFs were 62% (SD 19) of daily calories, and a disproportionally high percentage of daily added sugar (94%; SD 16) and low percentage of daily protein (47%; SD 24). Minimally processed foods were 30% (SD 17) of daily calories, and a disproportionally low percentage of daily added sugar (1%; SD 8) and high percentage of daily protein (43%; SD 24).ConclusionsThis method of Nova classifying NDSR-based 24-h dietary recalls was reliable and valid for identifying individual intake of processed foods, including UPFs.

Dataset Information

Assessing Dietary Diversity in Pregnant Women: Relative Validity of the List-Based and Open Recall Methods.

Publications

Assessing Dietary Diversity in Pregnant Women: Relative Validity of the List-Based and Open Recall Methods.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets