Low energy reporters vs others:: a comparison of reported food intakes

被引:189
作者
Krebs-Smith, SM
Graubard, BI
Kahle, LL
Subar, AF
Cleveland, LE
Ballard-Barbash, R
机构
[1] NCI, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[2] Informat Management Serv Inc, Silver Spring, MD USA
[3] USDA ARS, Riverdale, MD USA
关键词
diet surveys; dietary underreporting; energy intake; dietary assessment; diet recalls;
D O I
10.1038/sj.ejcn.1600936
中图分类号
R15 [营养卫生、食品卫生]; TS201 [基础科学];
学科分类号
100403 ;
摘要
Objective: To partition the food reports of low energy reporters (LERs) and non-LERs into four aspects-tendency to report a given food, frequency of reports per user, portion sizes per mention, and the qualitative (low-fat? low-sugar, low-energy) differences of the reports - in order to determine what differentiates them from one another. Assessment method: Two non-consecutive 24h dietary recalls. Low energy reporting was defined as energy intake lower than 80% of estimated basal metabolic rate. Setting:In-home personal interviews. Subjects: 8334 adults from a stratified, multi-stage area probability sample designed to be representative of noninstitutionlized persons residing in households in the United States. Results: Across all different types of foods, there are those food groups which LERs are less likely to report (28 of 44 food groups), those which they report less frequently when they do report them (15 of 44 groups), and those for which they report smaller quantities per mention (26 of 44). Qualitative differences in the food choices - that is, differences in fat, sugar, and/or energy content-were not so widespread (4 of 24 food groups). Conclusions: The practical application of analyses such as these is to improve the methods of gathering dietary data so that this kind of bias can be reduced. Further methodological research is needed to reduce the likelihood of respondents neglecting to mention foods and underestimating portion sizes.
引用
收藏
页码:281 / 287
页数:7
相关论文
共 25 条
[1]   ISSUES IN ECOSYSTEM VALUATION - IMPROVING INFORMATION FOR DECISION-MAKING [J].
BINGHAM, G ;
BISHOP, R ;
BRODY, M ;
BROMLEY, D ;
CLARK, E ;
COOPER, W ;
COSTANZA, R ;
HALE, T ;
HAYDEN, G ;
KELLERT, S ;
NORGAARD, R ;
NORTON, B ;
PAYNE, J ;
RUSSELL, C ;
SUTER, G .
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 1995, 14 (02) :73-90
[3]  
BLACK AE, 1991, EUR J CLIN NUTR, V45, P583
[4]  
Black AE, 1996, NUTR REV, V54, P170, DOI 10.1111/j.1753-4887.1996.tb03924.x
[5]  
BLACK AE, 1998, EUR J CLIN NUTR, V52, P517
[6]  
BREIFEL RR, 1997, AM J CLIN NUTR, V65, pS1203
[7]  
BREIFEL RR, 1995, AM J CLIN NUTR S, V62, pS1072
[8]  
Cleveland LE, 1997, AM J CLIN NUTR, V65, P1254
[9]  
GOLDBERG GR, 1991, EUR J CLIN NUTR, V45, P569
[10]  
Goris A. H. C., 1998, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, V52, pS18