基于时间的营养行为问卷（CNBQ）相对于11天基于事件的饮食生态瞬时评估日记的相对效度。

Relative validity of the Chrono-Nutrition Behavior Questionnaire (CNBQ) against 11-day event-based ecological momentary assessment diaries of eating.

作者信息

Murakami Kentaro, Shinozaki Nana, McCaffrey Tracy A, Livingstone M Barbara E, Masayasu Shizuko, Sasaki Satoshi

机构信息

Department of Social and Preventive Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, 113 - 0033, Japan.

Department of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Clayton, Melbourne, Australia.

出版信息

Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2025 Apr 25;22(1):46. doi: 10.1186/s12966-025-01740-9.

DOI:10.1186/s12966-025-01740-9

PMID:40275345

原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12023641/

Abstract

BACKGROUND

A growing number of studies have investigated chrononutrition-related variables in relation to health outcomes. However, only a few questionnaires specifically designed for assessing chrononutrition-related parameters have been validated. We aimed to examine the relative validity of the Chrono-Nutrition Behavior Questionnaire (CNBQ) against 11-day event-based ecological momentary assessment (EMA) diaries of eating.

METHODS

Informed by previous research, we developed the CNBQ for the comprehensive assessment of chrononutrition-related parameters, including sleep variables, eating frequency, timing of eating, duration of eating occasions, duration of eating windows, and time interval between sleep and eating, for workdays and non-workdays separately. Between February and April 2023, a total of 1050 Japanese adults aged 20-69 years completed the online CNBQ and subsequently kept event-based EMA food diaries for 11 days, including 6.5 workdays and 4.5 non-workdays on average.

RESULTS

Mean differences between estimates derived from the CNBQ and the EMA food diaries were < 10% for most of the variables examined, both for workdays (27 of 33; 82%) and non-workdays (25 of 33; 76%), and for variables based on differences between workdays and non-workdays, such as eating jetlag (5 of 6; 83%). Spearman correlation coefficients between estimates based on the CNBQ and estimates based on the EMA food diaries were ≥ 0.50 for 26 variables (79%) on workdays and 22 variables (67%) on non-workdays (e.g., mid-sleep time; total eating frequency; timing of first eating occasion, last eating occasion, first meal, and last meal; duration of first meal and last meal; duration of eating window; eating midpoint; and time interval between wake time and first eating occasion and between last meal and sleep time), and 2 variables based on differences between workdays and non-workdays (e.g., eating jetlag base on breakfast timing). Bland-Altman analysis showed that the limits of agreement were wide and that the bias of overestimation by the CNBQ was proportional as mean estimates of the CNBQ and EMA food diaries increased.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that the relative validity of the CNBQ justifies its use in estimating mean values and ranking individuals for the majority of chrononutrition-related parameters.

摘要

背景

越来越多的研究调查了与健康结果相关的时间营养学变量。然而，专门设计用于评估时间营养学相关参数的问卷仅有少数得到了验证。我们旨在对照基于11天事件的饮食生态瞬时评估（EMA）日记，检验时间营养行为问卷（CNBQ）的相对效度。

方法

根据先前的研究，我们开发了CNBQ，用于分别全面评估工作日和非工作日与时间营养学相关的参数，包括睡眠变量、进食频率、进食时间、进食时长、进食窗口时长以及睡眠与进食之间的时间间隔。2023年2月至4月期间，共有1050名年龄在20 - 69岁的日本成年人完成了在线CNBQ，随后记录了为期11天的基于事件的EMA饮食日记，平均包括6.5个工作日和4.5个非工作日。

结果

对于大多数所检查的变量，无论是工作日（33个变量中的27个；82%）还是非工作日（33个变量中的25个；76%），以及基于工作日和非工作日差异的变量，如饮食时差（6个变量中的5个；83%），CNBQ和EMA饮食日记得出的估计值之间的平均差异均<10%。基于CNBQ的估计值与基于EMA饮食日记的估计值之间的Spearman相关系数，在工作日的26个变量（79%）和非工作日的22个变量（67%）中≥0.50（例如，睡眠中点时间；总进食频率；首次进食时间、末次进食时间、第一餐和最后一餐的时间；第一餐和最后一餐的时长；进食窗口时长；进食中点；以及起床时间与首次进食时间之间和最后一餐与睡眠时间之间的时间间隔），以及基于工作日和非工作日差异的2个变量（例如，基于早餐时间的饮食时差）。Bland - Altman分析表明，一致性界限较宽，且随着CNBQ和EMA饮食日记的平均估计值增加，CNBQ高估的偏差成比例增加。