Information de reference pour ce titreAccession Number: | 00000429-201012010-00012.
|
Author: | Kwan, Marilyn L.; Kushi, Lawrence H.; Song, Jun; Timperi, Allegra W.; Boynton, Alanna M.; Johnson, Karen M.; Standley, Judi; Kristal, Alan R.
|
Title: | |
Source: | American Journal of Epidemiology. 172(11):1315-1323, December 01, 2010.
|
Abstract: | Multiple-day diet records can be unsuitable for cohort studies because of high administrative and analytical costs. Costs could be reduced if a subsample of participants were analyzed in a nested case-control study. However, completed records are usually reviewed ("documented") with participants to correct errors and omissions before analysis. The authors evaluated the suitability of using undocumented 3-day food records in 2 samples of women in a Northern California cohort study of breast cancer survivorship (2006-2009). One group of participants (n = 130) received an introduction to the food record at enrollment, while another (n = 70) received more comprehensive instruction. Food records were mailed to participants 6 months later for follow-up and were analyzed as received and after phone documentation. Error rates for adequate completion were high in the first group but substantially lower among persons receiving instruction; prevalences of missing data on serving size and incomplete food descriptions changed from 30% to 4% and from 32% to 6%, respectively (P < 0.0001). Correlations between nutrient intakes calculated from undocumented and documented records were 0.72-0.93 in the first group and were significantly stronger (0.84-0.99) among persons receiving instruction. Documentation had little effect on intraclass correlation coefficients across days, but training increased the coefficients for many nutrients. When participants receive proper instruction, undocumented food records can be satisfactory for large epidemiologic studies.
(C) Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health 2010. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.
|
Author Keywords: | breast neoplasms; cohort studies; data collection; diet records; reproducibility of results.
|
References: | 1. Armstrong BK, White E, Saracci R. Principles of Exposure Measurement in Epidemiology. (Monographs in Epidemiology and Biostatistics) 1994 NewYork, NY Oxford University Press
2. Kristal AR, Shattuck AL, Williams AE. Food frequency questionnaires for diet intervention research. 17th National Nutrient Databank Conference 1994 Baltimore, MD International Life Sciences Institute:110-125
3. Willett WC. Nutritional Epidemiology 1998 New York, NY Oxford University Press
4. Kolar AS, Patterson RE, White E, et al. A practical method for collecting 3-day food records in a large cohort. Epidemiology 2005;16(4):579-583
5. Kwan ML, Ambrosone CB, Lee MM, et al. The Pathways Study: a prospective study of breast cancer survivorship within Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Cancer Causes Control 2008;19(10):1065-1076
6. Schakel SF, Buzzard IM, Gebhardt SE. Procedures for estimating nutrient values for food composition databases. J Food Compost Anal 1997;10:102-114
7. Schakel SF, Sievert YA, Buzzard IM. Sources of data for developing and maintaining a nutrient database. J Am Diet Assoc. 1988;88(10):1268-1271
8. Konishi S, Gupta AK. Testing the equality of several intraclass correlation coefficients. J Stat Plan Inference 1989;21:93-105
9. Kristal AR, Peters U, Potter JD. Is it time to abandon the food frequency questionnaire?. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005;14(12):2826-2828
10. Kristal AR, Potter JD. Not the time to abandon the food frequency questionnaire: counterpoint. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15(10):1759-1760
11. Willett WC, Hu FB. Not the time to abandon the food frequency questionnaire: point. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15(10):1757-1758
12. Bingham SA, Luben R, Welch A, et al. Are imprecise methods obscuring a relation between fat and breast cancer?. Lancet 2003;362(9379):212-214
13. Freedman LS, Potischman N, Kipnis V, et al. A comparison of two dietary instruments for evaluating the fat-breast cancer relationship. Int J Epidemiol 2006;35(4):1011-1021
14. Foster-Powell K, Holt SH, Brand-Miller JC. International table of glycemic index and glycemic load values: 2002. Am J Clin Nutr. 2002;76(1):5-56
|
Language: | English.
|
Document Type: | PRACTICE OF EPIDEMIOLOGY.
|
Journal Subset: | Public Health.
|
ISSN: | 0002-9262
|
NLM Journal Code: | 3h3, 7910653
|
DOI Number: | https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/aje/k...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre
|
Annotation(s) | |