Limits...
A novel online Food Recall Checklist for use in an undergraduate student population: a comparison with diet diaries.

Comrie F, Masson LF, McNeill G - Nutr J (2009)

Bottom Line: To measure diet of undergraduate students, a new online 121-item Food Recall Checklist (FoRC) was designed as an alternative to a non-weighed record (food diary).However, FoRC recorded significantly lower intakes of energy and alcohol and significantly higher intakes of fruit and vegetables and breakfast cereal compared with the food diary.For all variables except alcohol and percentage energy from fat, correlation co-efficients were statistically significant and greater than 0.5.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK. fiona.comrie@foodstandards.gsi.gov.uk

ABSTRACT

Background: University students are commonly overlooked when diet of populations is measured and there is a lack of comprehensive dietary assessment in whole university student populations. To measure diet of undergraduate students, a new online 121-item Food Recall Checklist (FoRC) was designed as an alternative to a non-weighed record (food diary). This article reports the comparison between the new dietary assessment method (FoRC) and the food diary as a measure of energy (kJ), fat (g), Non-Starch Polysaccharide (NSP) (g), fruit and vegetables (g), breakfast cereal (g) and bread (g) and alcohol (units) intake.

Methods: Fifty-three students at the University of Aberdeen completed four days of FoRC then four days food diary. Median agreement and correlation between the two methods was assessed for foods and nutrients using the Spearman's rank correlation co-efficient and the Wilcoxon signed ranks test. Agreement between FoRC and food diary was assessed using the Bland-Altman method.

Results: The mean time taken to complete FoRC for one day was 7.4 minutes. Intakes of fat (g and % food energy), NSP and bread were similar between FoRC and the food diary. Median energy intake was 8185 kJ in the food diary and 8007 kJ in FoRC. However, FoRC recorded significantly lower intakes of energy and alcohol and significantly higher intakes of fruit and vegetables and breakfast cereal compared with the food diary. There was considerable variation in agreement between methods at the individual level. For all variables except alcohol and percentage energy from fat, correlation co-efficients were statistically significant and greater than 0.5.

Conclusion: At the group level, four days of FoRC showed good median agreement with the food diary and there was high correlation between methods for most foods and nutrients. This suggests that this novel method of assessing diet can provide a useful alternative for assessing group mean intakes but that individual intakes may need to be interpreted with care.

Show MeSH
Tailored food list in Food Recall Checklist (FoRC).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2654910&req=5

Figure 2: Tailored food list in Food Recall Checklist (FoRC).

Mentions: FoRC was developed to collect participants' dietary intake on the previous day via the Internet. The food list was developed with reference to existing dietary assessment methods [18] and more detailed investigations into the typical undergraduate diet. On the first page of FoRC, participants recorded the time periods when they consumed food and drink items on the previous day, then they selected the broad food and beverage groups consumed, choosing from a 16-item list (Figure 1). The next page showed a tailored list of the expanded elements for each of the main groups chosen on the previous page, accompanied by colour photographs of the selected foods (Figure 2). Inclusion of photographs in FoRC was designed to assist participants in estimating portion size [19]. The use of layers of questioning allowed participants extra time to recall foods and beverages consumed, as well as customizing the long food list to only the items participants had consumed.


A novel online Food Recall Checklist for use in an undergraduate student population: a comparison with diet diaries.

Comrie F, Masson LF, McNeill G - Nutr J (2009)

Tailored food list in Food Recall Checklist (FoRC).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2654910&req=5

Figure 2: Tailored food list in Food Recall Checklist (FoRC).
Mentions: FoRC was developed to collect participants' dietary intake on the previous day via the Internet. The food list was developed with reference to existing dietary assessment methods [18] and more detailed investigations into the typical undergraduate diet. On the first page of FoRC, participants recorded the time periods when they consumed food and drink items on the previous day, then they selected the broad food and beverage groups consumed, choosing from a 16-item list (Figure 1). The next page showed a tailored list of the expanded elements for each of the main groups chosen on the previous page, accompanied by colour photographs of the selected foods (Figure 2). Inclusion of photographs in FoRC was designed to assist participants in estimating portion size [19]. The use of layers of questioning allowed participants extra time to recall foods and beverages consumed, as well as customizing the long food list to only the items participants had consumed.

Bottom Line: To measure diet of undergraduate students, a new online 121-item Food Recall Checklist (FoRC) was designed as an alternative to a non-weighed record (food diary).However, FoRC recorded significantly lower intakes of energy and alcohol and significantly higher intakes of fruit and vegetables and breakfast cereal compared with the food diary.For all variables except alcohol and percentage energy from fat, correlation co-efficients were statistically significant and greater than 0.5.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK. fiona.comrie@foodstandards.gsi.gov.uk

ABSTRACT

Background: University students are commonly overlooked when diet of populations is measured and there is a lack of comprehensive dietary assessment in whole university student populations. To measure diet of undergraduate students, a new online 121-item Food Recall Checklist (FoRC) was designed as an alternative to a non-weighed record (food diary). This article reports the comparison between the new dietary assessment method (FoRC) and the food diary as a measure of energy (kJ), fat (g), Non-Starch Polysaccharide (NSP) (g), fruit and vegetables (g), breakfast cereal (g) and bread (g) and alcohol (units) intake.

Methods: Fifty-three students at the University of Aberdeen completed four days of FoRC then four days food diary. Median agreement and correlation between the two methods was assessed for foods and nutrients using the Spearman's rank correlation co-efficient and the Wilcoxon signed ranks test. Agreement between FoRC and food diary was assessed using the Bland-Altman method.

Results: The mean time taken to complete FoRC for one day was 7.4 minutes. Intakes of fat (g and % food energy), NSP and bread were similar between FoRC and the food diary. Median energy intake was 8185 kJ in the food diary and 8007 kJ in FoRC. However, FoRC recorded significantly lower intakes of energy and alcohol and significantly higher intakes of fruit and vegetables and breakfast cereal compared with the food diary. There was considerable variation in agreement between methods at the individual level. For all variables except alcohol and percentage energy from fat, correlation co-efficients were statistically significant and greater than 0.5.

Conclusion: At the group level, four days of FoRC showed good median agreement with the food diary and there was high correlation between methods for most foods and nutrients. This suggests that this novel method of assessing diet can provide a useful alternative for assessing group mean intakes but that individual intakes may need to be interpreted with care.

Show MeSH