Archer Edward, Hand Gregory A, Blair Steven N
Department of Exercise Science, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2013 Oct 9;8(10):e76632. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0076632. eCollection 2013.
Methodological limitations compromise the validity of U.S. nutritional surveillance data and the empirical foundation for formulating dietary guidelines and public health policies.
Evaluate the validity of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) caloric intake data throughout its history, and examine trends in the validity of caloric intake estimates as the NHANES dietary measurement protocols evolved.
Validity of data from 28,993 men and 34,369 women, aged 20 to 74 years from NHANES I (1971-1974) through NHANES 2009-2010 was assessed by: calculating physiologically credible energy intake values as the ratio of reported energy intake (rEI) to estimated basal metabolic rate (BMR), and subtracting estimated total energy expenditure (TEE) from NHANES rEI to create 'disparity values'.
The historical rEI/BMR values for men and women were 1.31 and 1.19, (95% CI: 1.30-1.32 and 1.18-1.20), respectively. The historical disparity values for men and women were -281 and -365 kilocalorie-per-day, (95% CI: -299, -264 and -378, -351), respectively. These results are indicative of significant under-reporting. The greatest mean disparity values were -716 kcal/day and -856 kcal/day for obese (i.e., ≥30 kg/m2) men and women, respectively.
Across the 39-year history of the NHANES, EI data on the majority of respondents (67.3% of women and 58.7% of men) were not physiologically plausible. Improvements in measurement protocols after NHANES II led to small decreases in underreporting, artifactual increases in rEI, but only trivial increases in validity in subsequent surveys. The confluence of these results and other methodological limitations suggest that the ability to estimate population trends in caloric intake and generate empirically supported public policy relevant to diet-health relationships from U.S. nutritional surveillance is extremely limited.
方法学上的局限性损害了美国营养监测数据的有效性以及制定饮食指南和公共卫生政策的实证基础。
评估美国国家健康与营养检查调查(NHANES)自开展以来热量摄入数据的有效性,并研究随着NHANES饮食测量方案的演变,热量摄入估计值有效性的变化趋势。
通过以下方式评估了来自NHANES I(1971 - 1974年)至NHANES 2009 - 2010年的28,993名20至74岁男性和34,369名女性的数据有效性:计算生理上可信的能量摄入值,即报告的能量摄入量(rEI)与估计基础代谢率(BMR)的比值,并从NHANES的rEI中减去估计的总能量消耗(TEE)以得出“差异值”。
1)以rEI/BMR比值表示的生理上可信的值;2)差异值(rEI - TEE)。
男性和女性的历史rEI/BMR值分别为1.31和1.19(95%置信区间:1.30 - 1.32和1.18 - 1.20)。男性和女性的历史差异值分别为每天 - 281千卡和 - 365千卡(95%置信区间: - 299, - 264和 - 378, - 351)。这些结果表明存在大量少报情况。肥胖(即≥30 kg/m²)男性和女性的最大平均差异值分别为每天 - 716千卡和 - 856千卡。
在NHANES的39年历史中,大多数受访者(67.3%的女性和58.7%的男性)的能量摄入(EI)数据在生理上不合理。NHANES II之后测量方案的改进导致少报情况略有减少,rEI出现人为增加,但在随后的调查中有效性仅略有提高。这些结果与其他方法学局限性共同表明,从美国营养监测中估计热量摄入的人群趋势以及生成与饮食 - 健康关系相关的实证支持的公共政策的能力极为有限。