Reproducibility and comparative validity of a food frequency questionnaire for Australian adults

Clare E. Collins; May Boggess; Jane F. Watson; Maya Guest; Kerith Duncanson; Kristine Pezdirc; Megan Rollo; Melinda J. Hutchesson; Tracy L. Burrows

doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2013.09.015

Reproducibility and comparative validity of a food frequency questionnaire for Australian adults

Clare E. Collins, May Boggess, Jane F. Watson, Maya Guest, Kerith Duncanson, Kristine Pezdirc, Megan Rollo, Melinda J. Hutchesson, Tracy L. Burrows

Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, School of (SoMSS)

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

147 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Food frequency questionnaires (FFQ) are used in epidemiological studies to investigate the relationship between diet and disease. There is a need for a valid and reliable adult FFQ with a contemporary food list in Australia. Aims: To evaluate the reproducibility and comparative validity of the Australian Eating Survey (AES) FFQ in adults compared to weighed food records (WFRs). Methods: Two rounds of AES and three-day WFRs were conducted in 97 adults (31 males, median age and BMI for males of 44.9 years, 26.2 kg/m², females 41.3 years, 24.0 kg/m². Reproducibility was assessed over six months using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and comparative validity was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) estimated by fitting a mixed effects model for each nutrient to account for age, sex and BMI to allow estimation of between and within person variance. Results: Reproducibility was found to be good for both WFR and FFQ since there were no significant differences between round 1 and 2 administrations. For comparative validity, FFQ ICCs were at least as large as those for WFR. The ICC of the WFR-FFQ difference for total energy intake was 0.6 (95% CI 0.43, 0.77) and the median ICC for all nutrients was 0.47, with all ICCs between 0.15 (%E from saturated fat) and 0.7 (g/day sugars). Conclusions: Compared to WFR the AES FFQ is suitable for reliably estimating the dietary intakes of Australian adults across a wide range of nutrients.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	906-914
Number of pages	9
Journal	Clinical Nutrition
Volume	33
Issue number	5
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2013.09.015
State	Published - Oct 2014

Keywords

Comparative validity
Dietary methods
Food frequency questionnaire
Intra-class correlation coefficient
Nutrition
Reproducibility

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Nutrition and Dietetics
Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Access to Document

10.1016/j.clnu.2013.09.015

Cite this

@article{5d98f303762a4651a4702d068f55a24c,

title = "Reproducibility and comparative validity of a food frequency questionnaire for Australian adults",

abstract = "Background: Food frequency questionnaires (FFQ) are used in epidemiological studies to investigate the relationship between diet and disease. There is a need for a valid and reliable adult FFQ with a contemporary food list in Australia. Aims: To evaluate the reproducibility and comparative validity of the Australian Eating Survey (AES) FFQ in adults compared to weighed food records (WFRs). Methods: Two rounds of AES and three-day WFRs were conducted in 97 adults (31 males, median age and BMI for males of 44.9 years, 26.2 kg/m2, females 41.3 years, 24.0 kg/m2. Reproducibility was assessed over six months using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and comparative validity was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) estimated by fitting a mixed effects model for each nutrient to account for age, sex and BMI to allow estimation of between and within person variance. Results: Reproducibility was found to be good for both WFR and FFQ since there were no significant differences between round 1 and 2 administrations. For comparative validity, FFQ ICCs were at least as large as those for WFR. The ICC of the WFR-FFQ difference for total energy intake was 0.6 (95% CI 0.43, 0.77) and the median ICC for all nutrients was 0.47, with all ICCs between 0.15 (%E from saturated fat) and 0.7 (g/day sugars). Conclusions: Compared to WFR the AES FFQ is suitable for reliably estimating the dietary intakes of Australian adults across a wide range of nutrients.",

keywords = "Comparative validity, Dietary methods, Food frequency questionnaire, Intra-class correlation coefficient, Nutrition, Reproducibility",

author = "Collins, {Clare E.} and May Boggess and Watson, {Jane F.} and Maya Guest and Kerith Duncanson and Kristine Pezdirc and Megan Rollo and Hutchesson, {Melinda J.} and Burrows, {Tracy L.}",

note = "Funding Information: This research project was funded by Meat and Livestock Australia Human Nutrition Research Program grant. CE Collins is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council, Career Development Fellowship . Funding Information: This research project was funded by a competitive grant from Meat and Livestock Australia Human Nutrition Research Program (G1000577). The views expressed in this manuscript are those of the authors. CEC is funded by a National Health and Medical Research Council Career Development Fellowship. The authors acknowledge the families who participated in the study as well as the student research assistants for data collection and data entry.",

year = "2014",

month = oct,

doi = "10.1016/j.clnu.2013.09.015",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "33",

pages = "906--914",

journal = "Clinical Nutrition",

issn = "0261-5614",

publisher = "Churchill Livingstone",

number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reproducibility and comparative validity of a food frequency questionnaire for Australian adults

AU - Collins, Clare E.

AU - Boggess, May

AU - Watson, Jane F.

AU - Guest, Maya

AU - Duncanson, Kerith

AU - Pezdirc, Kristine

AU - Rollo, Megan

AU - Hutchesson, Melinda J.

AU - Burrows, Tracy L.

N1 - Funding Information: This research project was funded by Meat and Livestock Australia Human Nutrition Research Program grant. CE Collins is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council, Career Development Fellowship . Funding Information: This research project was funded by a competitive grant from Meat and Livestock Australia Human Nutrition Research Program (G1000577). The views expressed in this manuscript are those of the authors. CEC is funded by a National Health and Medical Research Council Career Development Fellowship. The authors acknowledge the families who participated in the study as well as the student research assistants for data collection and data entry.

PY - 2014/10

Y1 - 2014/10

N2 - Background: Food frequency questionnaires (FFQ) are used in epidemiological studies to investigate the relationship between diet and disease. There is a need for a valid and reliable adult FFQ with a contemporary food list in Australia. Aims: To evaluate the reproducibility and comparative validity of the Australian Eating Survey (AES) FFQ in adults compared to weighed food records (WFRs). Methods: Two rounds of AES and three-day WFRs were conducted in 97 adults (31 males, median age and BMI for males of 44.9 years, 26.2 kg/m2, females 41.3 years, 24.0 kg/m2. Reproducibility was assessed over six months using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and comparative validity was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) estimated by fitting a mixed effects model for each nutrient to account for age, sex and BMI to allow estimation of between and within person variance. Results: Reproducibility was found to be good for both WFR and FFQ since there were no significant differences between round 1 and 2 administrations. For comparative validity, FFQ ICCs were at least as large as those for WFR. The ICC of the WFR-FFQ difference for total energy intake was 0.6 (95% CI 0.43, 0.77) and the median ICC for all nutrients was 0.47, with all ICCs between 0.15 (%E from saturated fat) and 0.7 (g/day sugars). Conclusions: Compared to WFR the AES FFQ is suitable for reliably estimating the dietary intakes of Australian adults across a wide range of nutrients.

AB - Background: Food frequency questionnaires (FFQ) are used in epidemiological studies to investigate the relationship between diet and disease. There is a need for a valid and reliable adult FFQ with a contemporary food list in Australia. Aims: To evaluate the reproducibility and comparative validity of the Australian Eating Survey (AES) FFQ in adults compared to weighed food records (WFRs). Methods: Two rounds of AES and three-day WFRs were conducted in 97 adults (31 males, median age and BMI for males of 44.9 years, 26.2 kg/m2, females 41.3 years, 24.0 kg/m2. Reproducibility was assessed over six months using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and comparative validity was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) estimated by fitting a mixed effects model for each nutrient to account for age, sex and BMI to allow estimation of between and within person variance. Results: Reproducibility was found to be good for both WFR and FFQ since there were no significant differences between round 1 and 2 administrations. For comparative validity, FFQ ICCs were at least as large as those for WFR. The ICC of the WFR-FFQ difference for total energy intake was 0.6 (95% CI 0.43, 0.77) and the median ICC for all nutrients was 0.47, with all ICCs between 0.15 (%E from saturated fat) and 0.7 (g/day sugars). Conclusions: Compared to WFR the AES FFQ is suitable for reliably estimating the dietary intakes of Australian adults across a wide range of nutrients.

KW - Comparative validity

KW - Dietary methods

KW - Food frequency questionnaire

KW - Intra-class correlation coefficient

KW - Nutrition

KW - Reproducibility

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84906055715&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84906055715&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.clnu.2013.09.015

DO - 10.1016/j.clnu.2013.09.015

M3 - Article

C2 - 24144913

AN - SCOPUS:84906055715

SN - 0261-5614

VL - 33

SP - 906

EP - 914

JO - Clinical Nutrition

JF - Clinical Nutrition

IS - 5

ER -

Reproducibility and comparative validity of a food frequency questionnaire for Australian adults

Abstract

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this