Dataset Information

Reproducibility and Validity of A Posteriori Dietary Patterns: A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT: The effective use of dietary patterns (DPs) remains limited. There is a need to assess their consistency over multiple administrations of the same dietary source, different dietary sources, or across different studies. Similarly, their generalizability should be based on a previous assessment of DP construct validity. However, to date, no systematic reviews of reproducibility and validity of a posteriori DPs have been carried out. In addition, several methodological questions related to their identification are still open and prevent a fair comparison of epidemiological results on DPs and disease. A systematic review of the literature on the PubMed database was conducted. We identified 218 articles, 64 of which met the inclusion criteria. Of these, the 38 articles dealing with reproducibility and relative and construct validity of DPs were included. These articles (published in 1999-2017, 53% from 2010 onwards) were based on observational studies conducted worldwide. The 14 articles that assessed DP reproducibility across different statistical solutions examined different research questions. Included were: the number of food groups or subjects; input variable format (as well as adjustment for energy intake); algorithms and the number of DPs to retain in cluster analysis; rotation method; and score calculation in factor analysis. However, we identified at most 3 articles per research question on DP reproducibility across statistical solutions. From another 15 articles, reproducibility of DPs over shorter (?1 y) time periods was generally good and higher than DP relative validity (as measured across different dietary sources). Confirmatory factor analysis was used in 15 of the included articles. It provided reassuring results in identifying valid dietary constructs characterizing the populations under consideration. Based on the available evidence, only suggestive conclusions can be derived on reproducibility across different statistical solutions. Nevertheless, most identified DPs showed good reproducibility, fair relative validity, and good construct validity.

SUBMITTER: Edefonti V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7442345 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Reproducibility and Validity of A Posteriori Dietary Patterns: A Systematic Review.

Edefonti Valeria V De Vito Roberta R Dalmartello Michela M Patel Linia L Salvatori Andrea A Ferraroni Monica M

Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) 20200301 2

The effective use of dietary patterns (DPs) remains limited. There is a need to assess their consistency over multiple administrations of the same dietary source, different dietary sources, or across different studies. Similarly, their generalizability should be based on a previous assessment of DP construct validity. However, to date, no systematic reviews of reproducibility and validity of a posteriori DPs have been carried out. In addition, several methodological questions related to their id ...[more]

PMID: 31578550

Similar Datasets

Project description:Few studies have considered if a posteriori dietary patterns (DPs) are generalizable across different centers or studies, or if they are consistently seen over time. To date, no systematic search of the literature on these topics has been carried out. A scoping review was conducted through a systematic search on the PubMed database. In the current review, we included the 34 articles examining the extent to which a posteriori DPs were consistently seen: 1) across centers from the same study or across different studies potentially representing different populations or countries (here indicated as cross-study reproducibility) and 2) over longer time periods (i.e., ≥2 y) (here indicated as stability over time). Selected articles (published in 1981-2019, 32% from 2010 onwards) were based on observational studies, mostly from Europe and North America. Five articles were based on children and/or adolescents and 14 articles included adults (2 men; 12 women, of whom 3 were pregnant women). A posteriori DPs were mostly derived (32 articles) with principal component or factor analyses. Among the 9 articles assessing DP reproducibility across studies (number of centers/studies: 2-27; median: 3), 5 provided a formal assessment using statistical methods (4 index-based approaches of different complexity, 1 statistical model). A median of 4 DPs was reproduced across centers/studies (range: 1-7). Among the 25 articles assessing DP stability over time (number of time-occasions: 2-6; median: 3), 19 provided a formal assessment with statistical methods (17 index-based and/or test-based approaches, 1 statistical model, 1 with both strategies). The number and composition of DPs remained mostly stable over time. Based on the limited evidence collected, most identified DPs showed good reproducibility across studies and stability over time. However, when present within the single studies, the criteria for the formal assessment of cross-study reproducibility or stability over time were generally very basic.

Project description:Dietary assessment methods that are recognized as appropriate for the general population are usually applied in a similar manner to athletes, despite the knowledge that sport-specific factors can complicate assessment and impact accuracy in unique ways. As dietary assessment methods are used extensively within the field of sports nutrition, there is concern the validity of methodologies have not undergone more rigorous evaluation in this unique population sub-group. The purpose of this systematic review was to compare two or more methods of dietary assessment, including dietary intake measured against biomarkers or reference measures of energy expenditure, in athletes. Six electronic databases were searched for English-language, full-text articles published from January 1980 until June 2016. The search strategy combined the following keywords: diet, nutrition assessment, athlete, and validity; where the following outcomes are reported but not limited to: energy intake, macro and/or micronutrient intake, food intake, nutritional adequacy, diet quality, or nutritional status. Meta-analysis was performed on studies with sufficient methodological similarity, with between-group standardized mean differences (or effect size) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) being calculated. Of the 1624 studies identified, 18 were eligible for inclusion. Studies comparing self-reported energy intake (EI) to energy expenditure assessed via doubly labelled water were grouped for comparison (n = 11) and demonstrated mean EI was under-estimated by 19% (-2793 ± 1134 kJ/day). Meta-analysis revealed a large pooled effect size of -1.006 (95% CI: -1.3 to -0.7; p < 0.001). The remaining studies (n = 7) compared a new dietary tool or instrument to a reference method(s) (e.g., food record, 24-h dietary recall, biomarker) as part of a validation study. This systematic review revealed there are limited robust studies evaluating dietary assessment methods in athletes. Existing literature demonstrates the substantial variability between methods, with under- and misreporting of intake being frequently observed. There is a clear need for careful validation of dietary assessment methods, including emerging technical innovations, among athlete populations.

Dataset Information

Reproducibility and Validity of A Posteriori Dietary Patterns: A Systematic Review.

Publications

Reproducibility and Validity of A Posteriori Dietary Patterns: A Systematic Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets