Crozier Sarah R, Inskip Hazel M, Godfrey Keith M, Robinson Siân M
MRC Epidemiology Resource Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK.
Br J Nutr. 2008 Apr;99(4):869-75. doi: 10.1017/S0007114507831746. Epub 2007 Nov 16.
There is growing interest in the use of dietary patterns as measures of exposure in studies of diet-disease relationships. However, relatively little is known about the impact of the type of dietary assessment method on the patterns observed. Using FFQ and food diary data collected from 585 women in early pregnancy we used principal component analysis to define dietary patterns. The first pattern was very similar in both datasets and was termed the 'prudent' diet. The second pattern, whilst comparable for the FFQ and food diaries, showed greater variation in coefficients than the prudent pattern; it was termed the 'Western' diet. Differences between the FFQ and diary scores were calculated for each woman for both the prudent and Western diet patterns. Of the differences in the prudent diet score, 95 % lay within +/- 1.58 sd of the mean, and 95 % of the differences in the Western diet scores lay within +/- 2.22 sd of the mean. Pearson's correlation coefficients were 0.67 (P < 0.001) for the prudent diet score and 0.35 (P < 0.001) for the Western diet score. The agreement between the FFQ and diary scores was lowest amongst respondents who were younger, had lower educational attainment and whose diaries were coded as 'poor, probably incomplete', although these effects were small. The first two dietary patterns identified in this cohort of pregnant women appear to be defined similarly by both FFQ and diary data, suggesting that FFQ data provide useful information on dietary patterns.
在饮食与疾病关系的研究中，将饮食模式作为暴露测量指标的关注度日益增加。然而，对于饮食评估方法的类型对所观察到的模式的影响，人们了解得相对较少。利用从585名孕早期女性收集的食物频率问卷（FFQ）和食物日记数据，我们采用主成分分析来定义饮食模式。在两个数据集中，第一种模式非常相似，被称为“谨慎”饮食。第二种模式，虽然食物频率问卷和食物日记的结果具有可比性，但与谨慎模式相比，其系数显示出更大的变异性；它被称为“西方”饮食。针对每位女性，计算了谨慎饮食模式和西方饮食模式下食物频率问卷与日记得分之间的差异。在谨慎饮食得分的差异中，95%落在均值的±1.58个标准差范围内，而西方饮食得分差异的95%落在均值的±2.22个标准差范围内。谨慎饮食得分的Pearson相关系数为0.67（P<0.001），西方饮食得分的Pearson相关系数为0.35（P<0.001）。在年龄较小、教育程度较低且日记被编码为“差，可能不完整”的受访者中，食物频率问卷和日记得分之间的一致性最低，尽管这些影响较小。在这组孕妇中确定的前两种饮食模式，通过食物频率问卷和日记数据的定义似乎相似，这表明食物频率问卷数据为饮食模式提供了有用信息。
