Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T15:34:11.763Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Development and simulated validation of a food-frequency questionnaire for the Colombian population

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2007

Leonelo E Bautista ,
Oscar F Herrán  and
Jane A Pryer
Leonelo E Bautista*
Affiliation:
Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin Medical School, 610 Walnut Street, 703 WARF, Madison, WI 53726-2397, USA
Oscar F Herrán
Affiliation:
Centro de Investigación Epidemiológica, Observatorio Epidemiológico de Enfermedades Cardiovasculares, Universidad Industrial de Santander, Bucaramanga, Colombia
Jane A Pryer
Affiliation:
Royal Free and University College Medical School, University College London, Department of Primary Care and Population Sciences, UK
*
*Corresponding author: Email lebautista@wisc.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objective

To develop a food-frequency questionnaire (FFQ) useful for ranking of nutrient intakes.

Design

Subjects consuming their regular diet completed 7 days of weighed intake registry (7-WIR). Foods for the FFQ were selected by stepwise multiple regression. The FFQ was then completed for each subject using data on individual food consumption from the 7-WIR. The correlation and agreement between the extrapolated FFQ and the 7-WIR data were assessed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficients (rS) and Bland and Altman's limits of agreement (LOA).

Setting

Bucaramanga, Colombia.

Subjects

We studied 97 randomly selected 20–40-year-old subjects.

Results

Sixty foods were selected for the FFQ. The 7-WIR and the extrapolated FFQ intake estimates correlated well. rS was 0.58 for energy, 0.53 for carbohydrate, 0.50 for total fat, and 0.48 for protein. For micronutrients, rS varied from 0.46 (manganese) to 0.71 (vitamin B12). FFQ average intake estimates were 83%, 80%, 86.2% and 86.4% of 7-WIR estimates for energy, carbohydrate, total fat and protein, respectively. LOA for these nutrients ranged between 45% and 165%. FFQ micronutrient intakes were on average 96% (median) of those from the 7-WIR, and the median lower and upper LOA were 50% and 203%. However, there was no indication that the degree of agreement varied with the level of intake.

Conclusions

According to our simulated validation, this FFQ may be useful to rank subjects by nutrient intake. Its validity against standard independent measurements and its applicability to other subsets of the Colombian population should be carefully considered.

Keywords

Nutritional assessmentFood-frequency questionnaireWeighed food registryColombia
Type
Research Article
Information
Public Health Nutrition , Volume 8 , Issue 2 , April 2005 , pp. 181 - 188
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2005

References

1Bowen, DJ, Beresford, SA. Dietary interventions to prevent disease. Annual Review of Public Health 2002; 23: 255–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2Willett, WC, ed. Food-frequency methods. In: Nutritional Epidemiology. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998; 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3Kristal, AR, Feng, Z, Coates, RJ, Oberman, A, George, V. Associations of race/ethnicity, education, and dietary intervention with the validity and reliability of a food frequency questionnaire: the Women's Health Trial Feasibility Study in Minority Populations. American Journal of Epidemiology 1997; 146: 856–69.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4Day, N, McKeown, N, Wong, M, Welch, A, Bingham, S. Epidemiological assessment of diet: a comparison of a 7-day diary with a food frequency questionnaire using urinary markers of nitrogen, potassium and sodium. International Journal of Epidemiology 1997; 30: 309–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5Prentice, RL. Dietary assessment and the reliability of nutritional epidemiology reports. Lancet 2003; 362: 182–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6Departamento Nacional de Planeación (DNP). Estratificación Socioeconómica. Manual General. Cabeceras Municipales Tipo 3 y Localidades o Centros Poblados Hasta con Tres Mil Habitantes. Bogotá, Colombia: DNP, 1994.Google Scholar
7US Department of Agriculture. Nutritive Value of Food. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1988.Google Scholar
8Instituto Colombiano de Bienestar Familiar. Tabla de Composición de Alimentos Colombianos. 6th ed. Santa Fe de Bogotá, Colombia: Ministerio de Salud, 1992.Google Scholar
9Centro de Atención Nutricional. Tabla de Composición de Alimentos. Medellin, Colombia: Centro de Atención Nutricional 1990.Google Scholar
10Herran, O, Bautista, L. Tabla de Composición de Alimentos Consumidos en Bucaramanga. Bucaramanga, Colombia: Universidad Industrial de Santander, 2002.Google Scholar
11Lauritsen, J. FoodCalc 1.3: Diet, Cancer and Health project at the Danish Cancer Society, Copenhagen, Denmark, 1998.Google Scholar
12Mark, SD, Thomas, DG, Decarli, A. Measurement of exposure to nutrients: an approach to the selection of informative foods. American Journal of Epidemiology 1996; 143: 514–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13Bautista, L, Herrán-Falla, O. NutCalc [1.2], Bucaramanga, Colombia: Universidad Industrial de Santander 2001.Google Scholar
14Lin, LI-K. A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 1989; 45: 255–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15Lin, LI-K. A note on the concordance correlation coefficient. Biometrics 2000; 56: 324–5.Google Scholar
16Masson, LF, McNeill, G, Tomany, JO, Simpson, JA, Peace, HS, Wei, L, et al. Statistical approaches for assessing the relative validity of a food-frequency questionnaire: use of correlation coefficients and the kappa statistic. Public Health Nutrition 2003; 6: 313–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17Cohen, J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement 1960; 20: 37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18Cohen, J. Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with a provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychological Bulletin 1968; 70: 213–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19Bland, JM, Altman, DG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 1999; 8: 135–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20Bland, JM, Altman, DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1: 307–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21Ambrosini, GL, van Roosbroeck, SA, Mackerras, D, Fritschi, L, de Klerk, NH, Musk, AW. The reliability of ten-year dietary recall: implications for cancer research. Journal of Nutrition 2003; 133: 2663–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22Cade, J, Thompson, R, Burley, V, Warm, D. Development, validation and utilisation of food-frequency questionnaires – a review. Public Health Nutrition 2002; 5: 567–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23PROFAMILIA. Encuesta Nacional de Demografía y Salud. Resumen Región Oriental. Bogotá, Colombia: PROFAMILIA, 2000.Google Scholar
24Ambrosini, GL, de Klerk, NH, Musk, AW, Mackerras, D. Agreement between a brief food frequency questionnaire and diet records using two statistical methods. Public Health Nutrition 2001; 4: 255–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25Navarro, A, Osella, AR, Guerra, V, Munoz, SE, Lantieri, MJ, Eynard, AR. Reproducibility and validity of a food-frequency questionnaire in assessing dietary intakes and food habits in epidemiological cancer studies in Argentina. Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research 2001; 20: 365–70.Google ScholarPubMed
26Slater, B, Philippi, ST, Fisberg, RM, Latorre, MR. Validation of a semi-quantitative adolescent food frequency questionnaire applied at a public school in Sao Paulo, Brazil. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2003; 57: 629–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27Johansson, I, Hallmans, G, Wikman, A, Biessy, C, Riboli, E, Kaaks, R. Validation and calibration of food-frequency questionnaire measurements in the Northern Sweden Health and Disease cohort. Public Health Nutrition 2002; 5: 487–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed