Borrelli R, Cole T J, Di Biase G, Contaldo F
MRC Dunn Nutrition Unit, Cambridge, UK.
Eur J Clin Nutr. 1989 Jul;43(7):453-63.
Dietary intake for 18 nutrients in a sample of 230 free-living elderly people in Naples was assessed by three dietary assessment methods (diet history, 24-h recall and 3-d record). Different statistical criteria (the correlation coefficient, the mean difference and the proportion of individuals placed in the same thirds of distribution) were used to evaluate the agreement among different methods. Theoretical considerations are shown demonstrating the uselessness of the correlation coefficient in evaluating the agreement. In analysing the mean differences, diet history gave higher estimates of nutrient intake and 24-h recall gave lower estimates, when compared to the 3-d record. Large standard errors for the mean differences and small proportions of individuals placed in the same thirds of the distribution, for nearly all the nutrients examined, showed poor agreement among the three different methods. These findings strongly suggest the presence of bias in, at least, two of the three dietary assessment methods. Some statistical techniques for improving the diet record method in epidemiological studies are discussed: the need to transform nutrient intake data to achieve normality in the distribution; the number of days of recording required to produce a valid study; and the need to evaluate the bias in the diet record.
通过三种膳食评估方法（饮食史、24小时回顾法和3天记录法）对那不勒斯230名自由生活的老年人样本中18种营养素的膳食摄入量进行了评估。使用不同的统计标准（相关系数、平均差异以及处于分布相同三分位数的个体比例）来评估不同方法之间的一致性。理论分析表明，相关系数在评估一致性方面毫无用处。在分析平均差异时，与3天记录法相比，饮食史法对营养素摄入量的估计值较高，而24小时回顾法的估计值较低。几乎所有所检测营养素的平均差异标准误较大，且处于分布相同三分位数的个体比例较小，这表明三种不同方法之间的一致性较差。这些发现强烈表明，至少三种膳食评估方法中的两种存在偏差。讨论了一些在流行病学研究中改进饮食记录法的统计技术：将营养素摄入数据进行转换以使分布达到正态性的必要性；产生有效研究所需的记录天数；以及评估饮食记录中偏差的必要性。
