Suppr超能文献

[在人群研究中,自我报告的啤酒、葡萄酒和烈酒摄入量的有效性如何?]

[How valid are self-reported intakes of beer, wine and spirits in population studies?].

作者信息

Grønbaek M N, Heitmann B L

机构信息

H:S Kommunehospitalet, Institut for Sygdomsforebyggelse, Centre for Epidemilogisk Grundforskning.

出版信息

Ugeskr Laeger. 1997 May 19;159(21):3151-4.

PMID:9199002
Abstract

In order to compare data on intake of wine, beer and spirits from a frequency questionnaire with intake of each type of alcoholic beverage estimated from a dietary interview, a randomly selected sub-sample of 244 women and 249 men aged 35-65 years was cross-sectionally studied. The sample was a sub-sample of the Danish MONICA study. Mean outcome measure in the study was the differences in intake of beer, wine and spirits as reported by the frequency questionnaire and the diet history interview. We found an overall agreement between the two methods, with very little or no systematic variation for all three alcoholic beverages. We conclude that compared to a more time and money consuming thorough dietary interview, the traditional frequency questionnaires seem to sufficiently capture intakes of different types of alcohol. Bias in alcohol reporting by the frequency questionnaire does not seem responsible for the recently found decreased mortality among subjects with a daily intake of wine, nor the increased mortality from drinking of spirits.

摘要

为了将频率问卷中葡萄酒、啤酒和烈酒的摄入量数据与通过饮食访谈估算的每种酒精饮料摄入量进行比较,我们对244名年龄在35至65岁之间的女性和249名同龄男性组成的随机抽取子样本进行了横断面研究。该样本是丹麦莫尼卡研究的一个子样本。该研究的平均结果指标是频率问卷和饮食史访谈报告的啤酒、葡萄酒和烈酒摄入量差异。我们发现两种方法总体上具有一致性,对于所有三种酒精饮料几乎没有或没有系统差异。我们得出结论,与耗时耗钱的全面饮食访谈相比,传统的频率问卷似乎足以获取不同类型酒精的摄入量。频率问卷中酒精报告的偏差似乎既不是近期发现的每日饮用葡萄酒者死亡率降低的原因,也不是饮用烈酒导致死亡率增加的原因。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验