Wheeler C, Rutishauser I, Conn J, O'Dea K
Deakin Institute of Human Nutrition, Victoria, Australia.
Eur J Clin Nutr. 1994 Nov;48(11):795-809.
To compare the reproducibility and reported level of energy intake obtained using three versions of a meal-based food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) considering, firstly, the influence of FFQ format and, secondly, the influence of time interval between questionnaires.
The study was conducted in two parts. In the first, subjects were randomly allocated to three groups (one for each FFQ) and sent, by mail, the same FFQ to complete on two separate occasions with a time interval of 4-6 weeks. In the second study, the reproducibility of one of the FFQs used in the initial study was compared, after an interval of 3 months, in a further group of people, matched as far as possible for gender, age and socio-economic status of area of residence.
The study population was 651 supermarket shoppers from Geelong, a regional centre with a population of 150,000 situated in Victoria, Australia, who had previously responded to an in-store survey about meat purchasing patterns. Of the 651 shoppers, 144 women and nine men (38% of those eligible) in part I and 98 women and two men (45% of those eligible) in part II of the study satisfactorily completed a FFQ on both occasions.
While there were few statistically significant differences in terms of mean nutrient intake and nutrient density between the three FFQ formats, all under-estimated energy intake relative to the minimum estimated energy requirements for a sedentary population. A significant decrease in reported intake of approximately 10% was also observed, regardless of FFQ format used, when the same questionnaire was completed a second time after an interval of 4-6 weeks. In contrast, when the time interval between questionnaires was increased to 3 months, there were few significant differences in intake between the first and second administrations. Moreover those changes in food intake which were significantly different after the longer interval were, in general, consistent with expected seasonal changes in food intake patterns.
Under the conditions of our study differences in FFQ format appeared to have less effect on estimates of mean intake than the length of the time interval between questionnaires. Our results suggest that motivation to complete a FFQ is significantly diminished on the second occasion, when the interval between FFQs is only 4-6 weeks and to a lesser extent when it is 3 months. Researchers planning studies which aim to assess short-term changes in food intake by means of a FFQ, for example after an intervention programme, need to be aware of this effect and to determine its magnitude, by assessing the reproducibility of their FFQ over the relevant time-interval prior to the proposed intervention and by including an appropriate non-intervention comparison group in the design of their study if seasonal effects are likely to occur in the course of the study.
比较使用三种基于膳食的食物频率问卷(FFQ)版本所获得的能量摄入的可重复性及报告水平,首先考虑FFQ格式的影响,其次考虑问卷之间时间间隔的影响。
该研究分两部分进行。第一部分,将受试者随机分为三组(每组对应一种FFQ),通过邮件向他们发送相同的FFQ,让他们在两个不同的时间完成,时间间隔为4 - 6周。在第二项研究中,在3个月的间隔后,对初始研究中使用的一种FFQ的可重复性进行了比较,另一组人群在性别、年龄和居住地区的社会经济地位方面尽可能匹配。
研究人群为来自吉朗的651名超市购物者,吉朗是澳大利亚维多利亚州一个拥有15万人口的区域中心,这些购物者之前曾回应过一项关于肉类购买模式的店内调查。在651名购物者中,研究第一部分有144名女性和9名男性(符合条件者的38%),第二部分有98名女性和2名男性(符合条件者的45%)在两次调查中都令人满意地完成了FFQ。
虽然三种FFQ格式在平均营养素摄入量和营养素密度方面几乎没有统计学上的显著差异,但相对于久坐人群的最低估计能量需求,所有格式都低估了能量摄入。当在4 - 6周的间隔后再次填写相同问卷时,无论使用哪种FFQ格式,报告的摄入量也显著下降了约10%。相比之下,当问卷之间的时间间隔增加到3个月时,第一次和第二次调查的摄入量几乎没有显著差异。此外,在较长时间间隔后食物摄入量的显著变化通常与预期的食物摄入模式季节性变化一致。
在我们的研究条件下,FFQ格式的差异对平均摄入量估计的影响似乎小于问卷之间的时间间隔长度。我们的结果表明,当FFQ之间的间隔仅为4 - 6周时,第二次完成FFQ的积极性会显著降低,间隔为3个月时影响较小。计划通过FFQ评估食物摄入量短期变化的研究人员,例如在干预计划之后,需要意识到这种影响,并通过在拟议干预之前评估其FFQ在相关时间间隔内的可重复性,以及在研究设计中纳入适当的非干预比较组(如果研究过程中可能出现季节性影响)来确定其程度。