Suppr超能文献

白厅Ⅱ研究中的饮食评估:7天饮食日记与食物频率问卷的比较及与生物标志物相比的效度

Dietary assessment in Whitehall II: comparison of 7 d diet diary and food-frequency questionnaire and validity against biomarkers.

作者信息

Brunner E, Stallone D, Juneja M, Bingham S, Marmot M

机构信息

International Centre for Health and Society, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London Medical School, 1-19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 6BT, UK.

出版信息

Br J Nutr. 2001 Sep;86(3):405-14. doi: 10.1079/bjn2001414.

Abstract

The aim of the present cross-sectional study was to examine the agreement and disagreement between a 7 d diet diary (7DD) and a self-administered machine-readable food-frequency questionnaire (FFQ) asking about diet in the previous year, and to validate both methods with biomarkers of nutrient intake. The subjects were an age- and employment-grade-stratified random subsample of London-based civil servants (457 men and 403 women), aged 39-61 years, who completed both a 7DD and a FFQ at phase 3 follow-up (1991-1993) of the Whitehall II study. Mean daily intakes of dietary energy, total fat, saturated, monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fatty acids, linoleic acid, total carbohydrate excluding fibre, sugars, starch, dietary fibre, protein, vitamin C, vitamin E (as alpha-tocopherol equivalents), folate, carotenes (as total beta-carotene activity), Fe, Ca, Mg, K and alcohol were measured. Serum cholesteryl ester fatty acids (CEFA), plasma alpha-tocopherol and beta-carotene were also measured as biomarkers. Estimates of mean energy intake from the two methods were similar in men, and some 10 % higher according to the FFQ in women. Compared with the 7DD, the FFQ tended to overestimate plant-derived micronutrient intakes (carotenes from FFQ v. 7DD men 2713 (SD 1455) v. 2180 (SD 1188) microg/d, women 3100 (SD 1656) v. 2221 (SD 1180) microg/d, both differences P<0.0001) and to underestimate fat intake. Against plasma beta-carotene/cholesterol, carotene intake was as well estimated by the FFQ as the 7DD (Spearman rank correlations, men 0.32 v. 0.30, women 0.27 v. 0.22, all P< or =0.0001, energy-adjusted data). Ranking of participants by other nutrient intakes tended to be of the same order according to the two dietary methods, e.g. rank correlations for CEFA linoleic acid against FFQ and 7DD estimates respectively, men 0.38 v. 0.41, women 0.53 v. 0.62, all P< or =0.0001, energy-adjusted % fat). For alpha-tocopherol there were no correlations between plasma level and estimated intakes by either dietary method. Quartile agreement for energy-adjusted nutrient intakes between the two self-report methods was in the range 37-50 % for men and 32-44 % for women, and for alcohol, 57 % in both sexes. Disagreement (misclassification into extreme quartiles of intake) was in the range 0-6 % for both sexes. The dietary methods yielded similar prevalences (about 34 %) of low energy reporters. The two methods show satisfactory agreement, together with an expected level of systematic differences, in their estimates of nutrient intake. Against the available biomarkers, the machine-readable FFQ performed well in comparison with the manually coded 7DD in this study population. For both methods, regression-based adjustment of nutrient intake to mean dietary energy intake by gender appears on balance to be the optimal approach to data presentation and analysis, in view of the complex problem of low energy reporting.

摘要

本横断面研究的目的是检验7天饮食日记(7DD)与一份自行填写的、询问前一年饮食情况的机器可读食物频率问卷(FFQ)之间的一致性和不一致性,并通过营养素摄入生物标志物对这两种方法进行验证。研究对象是伦敦公务员中按年龄和职业级别分层的随机子样本(457名男性和403名女性),年龄在39 - 61岁之间,他们在白厅II研究的第3阶段随访(1991 - 1993年)时完成了7DD和FFQ。测量了膳食能量、总脂肪、饱和脂肪酸、单不饱和脂肪酸和多不饱和脂肪酸、亚油酸、不包括纤维的总碳水化合物、糖、淀粉、膳食纤维、蛋白质、维生素C、维生素E(以α - 生育酚当量计)、叶酸、类胡萝卜素(以总β - 胡萝卜素活性计)、铁、钙、镁、钾和酒精的平均每日摄入量。还测量了血清胆固醇酯脂肪酸(CEFA)、血浆α - 生育酚和β - 胡萝卜素作为生物标志物。两种方法对男性平均能量摄入的估计相似,而女性根据FFQ的估计值约高10%。与7DD相比,FFQ往往高估植物来源的微量营养素摄入量(FFQ与7DD相比,男性类胡萝卜素摄入量分别为2713(标准差1455)μg/d对2180(标准差1188)μg/d,女性为3100(标准差1656)μg/d对2221(标准差1180)μg/d,两者差异P<0.0001),并低估脂肪摄入量。与血浆β - 胡萝卜素/胆固醇相比,FFQ对类胡萝卜素摄入量的估计与7DD一样好(斯皮尔曼等级相关性,男性0.32对0.30,女性0.27对0.22,所有P≤0.0001,能量调整后的数据)。根据两种饮食方法,参与者按其他营养素摄入量的排名往往处于相同顺序,例如CEFA亚油酸与FFQ和7DD估计值的等级相关性,男性分别为0.38对0.41,女性为0.53对0.62,所有P≤0.0001,能量调整后的脂肪百分比)。对于α - 生育酚,血浆水平与两种饮食方法估计的摄入量之间均无相关性。两种自我报告方法之间能量调整后营养素摄入量的四分位数一致性在男性中为37 - 50%,女性中为32 - 44%,对于酒精,两性均为57%。不一致性(误分类为摄入量的极端四分位数)在两性中均为0 - 6%。两种饮食方法得出的低能量报告者的患病率相似(约34%)。在营养素摄入量的估计方面,这两种方法显示出令人满意的一致性,同时存在预期水平的系统差异。与现有的生物标志物相比,在本研究人群中,机器可读的FFQ与手工编码的7DD相比表现良好。鉴于低能量报告这一复杂问题,对于这两种方法,按性别对营养素摄入量进行基于回归的调整以使其与平均膳食能量摄入量相匹配,总体而言似乎是数据呈现和分析的最佳方法。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验