Riboli E, Elmståhl S, Saracci R, Gullberg B, Lindgärde F
International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Int J Epidemiol. 1997;26 Suppl 1:S161-73. doi: 10.1093/ije/26.suppl_1.s161.
Nutritional epidemiology relies largely on dietary assessment methods for the estimation of the "exposure' variables which may be related to disease risk.
This paper describes a methodological study conducted in Malmö, Sweden, to compare nutrient intake--estimated by two alternative dietary assessment methods--with a reference method consisting of 18 days of weighed food records. The two candidate methods were an extensive food frequency questionnaire with portion size to be estimated from a booklet of 120 sets of photos (method A) and a method involving the combination of a shorter questionnaire and a two-week food record (method B).
In absolute values, both methods overestimated nutrient intake by 20-40%, with method B closer to the reference for most nutrients. Both crude and energy-adjusted correlations between A-reference and B-reference were of the order of 0.50-0.60 for energy, energy-providing nutrients and most vitamins and minerals. Correlations were in the same range for most of the 14 fatty acids considered in the analyses. Protein intake, estimated from the analyses of urinary nitrogen on 6-8 repeated 24-hour urine collections per subject, was almost identical to the reference method values. Correlation between nitrogen-derived values and dietary measurement was 0.75.
Overall, the study indicated that both methods A and B had good ranking validity compared to the reference and that in most cases the combined method (B) performed slightly better than the extensive food frequency method (A).
营养流行病学在很大程度上依赖于膳食评估方法来估计可能与疾病风险相关的“暴露”变量。
本文描述了在瑞典马尔默进行的一项方法学研究,以比较通过两种替代膳食评估方法估计的营养素摄入量与由18天称重食物记录组成的参考方法。两种候选方法分别是一份详细的食物频率问卷,需根据一本包含120套照片的小册子来估计食物分量(方法A),以及一种将较短问卷与两周食物记录相结合的方法(方法B)。
绝对值方面,两种方法均将营养素摄入量高估了20% - 40%,对于大多数营养素,方法B更接近参考值。对于能量、提供能量的营养素以及大多数维生素和矿物质,方法A与参考值之间以及方法B与参考值之间的原始相关性和能量调整相关性在0.50 - 0.60左右。分析中考虑的14种脂肪酸中的大多数,其相关性也在相同范围内。通过对每位受试者6 - 8次重复的24小时尿液收集进行尿氮分析估计的蛋白质摄入量,几乎与参考方法值相同。氮衍生值与膳食测量之间的相关性为0.75。
总体而言,该研究表明与参考方法相比,方法A和方法B都具有良好的排序效度,并且在大多数情况下,组合方法(B)的表现略优于详细食物频率方法(A)。