Vainik Uku, Konstabel Kenn, Lätt Evelin, Mäestu Jarek, Purge Priit, Jürimäe Jaak
1Institute of Psychology,University of Tartu,Näituse 2,50410,Tartu,Estonia.
4Faculty of Exercise and Sport Sciences,University of Tartu,Jakobi 5,51014,Tartu,Estonia.
Br J Nutr. 2016 Oct;116(8):1425-1436. doi: 10.1017/S0007114516003317. Epub 2016 Oct 11.
Subjective energy intake (sEI) is often misreported, providing unreliable estimates of energy consumed. Therefore, relating sEI data to health outcomes is difficult. Recently, Börnhorst et al. compared various methods to correct sEI-based energy intake estimates. They criticised approaches that categorise participants as under-reporters, plausible reporters and over-reporters based on the sEI:total energy expenditure (TEE) ratio, and thereafter use these categories as statistical covariates or exclusion criteria. Instead, they recommended using external predictors of sEI misreporting as statistical covariates. We sought to confirm and extend these findings. Using a sample of 190 adolescent boys (mean age=14), we demonstrated that dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry-measured fat-free mass is strongly associated with objective energy intake data (onsite weighted breakfast), but the association with sEI (previous 3-d dietary interview) is weak. Comparing sEI with TEE revealed that sEI was mostly under-reported (74 %). Interestingly, statistically controlling for dietary reporting groups or restricting samples to plausible reporters created a stronger-than-expected association between fat-free mass and sEI. However, the association was an artifact caused by selection bias - that is, data re-sampling and simulations showed that these methods overestimated the effect size because fat-free mass was related to sEI both directly and indirectly via TEE. A more realistic association between sEI and fat-free mass was obtained when the model included common predictors of misreporting (e.g. BMI, restraint). To conclude, restricting sEI data only to plausible reporters can cause selection bias and inflated associations in later analyses. Therefore, we further support statistically correcting sEI data in nutritional analyses. The script for running simulations is provided.
主观能量摄入量(sEI)常常被误报,从而对所摄入的能量提供不可靠的估计。因此,将sEI数据与健康结果相关联很困难。最近,博恩霍斯特等人比较了各种方法来校正基于sEI的能量摄入估计值。他们批评了基于sEI与总能量消耗(TEE)的比率将参与者分类为低报者、合理报告者和高报者,然后将这些类别用作统计协变量或排除标准的方法。相反,他们建议使用sEI误报的外部预测因素作为统计协变量。我们试图证实并扩展这些发现。使用190名青少年男性(平均年龄 = 14岁)的样本,我们证明双能X线吸收法测量的去脂体重与客观能量摄入数据(现场加权早餐)密切相关,但与sEI(之前的3天饮食访谈)的关联较弱。将sEI与TEE进行比较发现,sEI大多被低报(74%)。有趣的是,对饮食报告组进行统计控制或将样本限制为合理报告者会在去脂体重和sEI之间产生比预期更强的关联。然而,这种关联是由选择偏倚导致的假象——也就是说,数据重新采样和模拟表明,这些方法高估了效应大小,因为去脂体重与sEI既直接相关,又通过TEE间接相关。当模型纳入误报的常见预测因素(如BMI、克制)时,得到了sEI与去脂体重之间更现实的关联。总之,仅将sEI数据限制为合理报告者会在后续分析中导致选择偏倚和关联膨胀。因此,我们进一步支持在营养分析中对sEI数据进行统计校正。提供了运行模拟的脚本。