Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T03:10:13.640Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A culture-sensitive quantitative food frequency questionnaire used in an African population: 2. Relative validation by 7-day weighed records and biomarkers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2007

UE MacIntyre ,
CS Venter  and
HH Vorster
UE MacIntyre*
Affiliation:
Department of Paediatrics and Child Health, PO Box 168, Medical University of Southern Africa, 0204, South Africa
CS Venter
Affiliation:
Department of Nutrition and Family Ecology, Potchefstroom University for Christian Higher Education, Potchefstroom, South Africa
HH Vorster
Affiliation:
Department of Nutrition and Family Ecology, Potchefstroom University for Christian Higher Education, Potchefstroom, South Africa
*
*Corresponding author: Email [email protected]
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 determine the relative validity of the culture-sensitive quantitative food frequency questionnaire (QFFQ) developed for the Transition, Health and Urbanisation in South Africa (THUSA) study by 7-day weighed food records, urinary nitrogen excretion and basal metabolic rate (BMR).

Design:

A cross-sectional study.

Setting:

A community-based study in a population stratified according to level of urbanization.

Subjects:

Residents of the North West Province, South Africa, aged between 15 and 65 years. The weighed food record study comprised 74 participants while 104 participants collected 24-hour urine samples.

Methods:

All participants were interviewed using the QFFQ. For the weighed food record study, participants kept detailed weighed food diaries for seven consecutive days. For the urinary nitrogen study, participants made one 24-hour urine collection. Completeness of the urine collections was checked against 240 mg para-aminobenzoic acid. BMR was estimated by the Schofield equations.

Results:

Spearman rank correlation coefficients between the QFFQ and weighed food record ranged between 0.14 (fibre) and 0.59 (vitamin C). The QFFQ tended to underestimate intakes compared with the weighed records. Quintile distributions were similar for both methods. The correlation between urinary nitrogen excretion and dietary intake was poor. Possible underreporting was identified for 43% of the participants with the QFFQ and 28% with the weighed food record.

Conclusions:

The QFFQ appeared to be a relatively valid instrument for the assessment of dietary intakes of the population of the North West Province. The use of biomarkers in this population was difficult and needs further investigation.

Keywords

DietarysurveysCultureValidationBiomarkers
Type
Research Article
Information
Public Health Nutrition , Volume 4 , Issue 1 , February 2001 , pp. 63 - 71
Copyright
Copyright © CABI Publishing 2001

References

1Popkin, BM. The nutrition transition in low income countries: an emerging crisis. Nutr. Rev. 1994; 52: 285–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2Drewnowski, A, Popkin, BM. The nutrition transition: trends in the global diet. Nutr. Rev. 1997; 55: 31–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3Willett, W. Nutritional Epidemiology. Monographs in Epidemiology and Biostatistics No. 15. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.Google Scholar
4Bingham, SA. Validation of dietary assessment through biomarkers. In: Kok, FJ, van't Veer, P, eds. Biomarkers of Dietary Exposure. Proceedings of the 3rd Meeting on Nutritional Epidemiology. London: Smith-Gordon, 1991: 41–52.Google Scholar
5Grant, KI, Langenhoven, ML, Stockton, MA, Day, RS, Bauermeister, P. FoodFinder dietary analysis software. Release 1.10. Parowvallei: Medical Research Council, 1992.Google Scholar
6Bland, JM, Altman, DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; i: 307–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7Bingham, S, Cummings, JH. The use of 4-aminobenzoic acid as a marker to validate the completeness of 24h urine collections in man. Clin. Sci. 1983; 64: 629–35.Google Scholar
8Maroni, BJ, Steinman, TI, Mitch, WE. A method for estimating nitrogen intake of patients with chronic renal failure. Kidney Int. 1985; 27: 58–65.Google Scholar
9Schofield, WN. Predicting basal metabolic rate, new standards and review of previous work. Hum. Nutr. Clin. Nutr. 1985; 39C (Suppl.): 5–41.Google Scholar
10Männistö, S, Virtanen, M, Mikkonen, T, Pietinen, P. Reproducibility and validity of a food frequency questionnaire in a case–control study on breast cancer. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1996; 49: 401–9.Google Scholar
11Coates, RJ, Monteilh, CP. Assessment of food-frequency questionnaires in minority populations. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 1997; 65 (Suppl.): S1108–15.Google Scholar
12Lindroos, A-K, Lissner, L, Sjostrom, L. Validity and reproducibility of a self administered dietary questionnaire in obese and non-obese subjects. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 1993; 47: 461–81.Google ScholarPubMed
13Goldbohm, RA, van den Brandt, PA, Brants, HAM, van't Veer, PALM, Sturmans, F, Hermus, RJJ. Validation of a dietary questionnaire used in a large-scale prospective cohort study on diet and cancer. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 1994; 48: 253–65.Google Scholar
14Thompson, RL, Margetts, BM. Comparison of a food frequency questionnaire with a 10-day weighed record in cigarette smokers. Int. J. Epidemiol. 1993; 22: 824–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15Bingham, SA, Gill, C, Welch, A, et al. Comparison of dietary assessment methods in nutritional epidemiology: weighed records v 24-h recalls, food-frequency questionnaires and estimated-diet records. Br. J. Nutr. 1994; 72: 619–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16Bonifacj, C, Gerber, M, Scali, J, Daures, JP. Comparison of dietary assessment methods in a southern French population: use of weighed records, estimated-diet records and a food-frequency questionnaire. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 1997; 51: 217–31.Google Scholar
17Rimm, EB, Giovanucci, EL, Stampfer, MJ, Colditz, GA, Litin, LB, Willett, WC. Reproducibility and validity of an expanded self-administered semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire among male health professionals. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1992; 135: 1114–26.Google Scholar
18Larkin, FA, Metzner, HL, Thompson, FE, Flegal, KM, Guitr, KE. Comparison of estimated nutrient intakes by food frequency and dietary records in adults. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 1989; 89: 215–23.Google Scholar
19Block, GB, Woods, M, Potosky, A, Clifford, C. Validation of a self-administered diet history questionnaire using multiple diet records. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1990; 43: 1327–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20Hankin, JH, Wilkens, LR, Kolonel, LN, Yoshizawa, CN. Validation of a quantitative dietary history method in Hawaii. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1991; 133: 616–28.Google Scholar
21Margetts, BM, Cade, JE, Osmond, C. Comparison of a food frequency questionnaire with a diet record. Int. J. Epidemiol. 1989; 18: 868–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22Romieu, I, Meir, J, Stampfer, J, et al. Food predictors of beta-carotene and alpha-tocopherol: validation of a food frequency questionnaire. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1990; 131: 864–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23Kune, S, Kune, GA, Watson, LF. Observations on the reliability and validity of the design and diet history method in the Melbourne colorectal cancer study. Nutr. Cancer 1987; 9: 5–20.Google Scholar
24O'Donnell, MG, Nelson, M, Wise, PH, Walker, DM. A computerized questionnaire for use in diet health education. 1. Development and validation. Br. J. Nutr. 1991; 66: 3–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25Willett, WC, Sampson, L, Stampfer, MJ, et al. Reproducibility and validity of a semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1985; 12: 51–65.Google Scholar
26Salvini, S, Hunter, DJ, Sampson, L, et al. Food-based validation of a dietary questionnaire: the effects of week-to-week variation in food consumption. Int. J. Epidemiol. 1989; 18: 858–67.Google Scholar
27Hartman, AM, Brown, CC, Palmgren, J, et al. Variability in nutrient and food intakes among older middle aged men. Implications for design of epidemiologic and validation studies using food recording. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1990; 132: 999–1012.Google Scholar
28Black, AE, Jebb, SA, Bingham, SA, Runswick, SA, Poppitt, SD. The validation of energy and protein intakes by doubly labelled water and 24-hour urinary nitrogen excretion in post-obese subjects. J. Hum. Nutr. Diet. 1995; 8: 51–64.Google Scholar
29Bingham, SA, Cassidy, A, Cole, TJ, et al. Validation of weighed records and other methods of dietary assessment using the 24 h urine nitrogen technique and other biological markers. Br. J. Nutr. 1995; 73: 531–50.Google Scholar
30Price, GM, Paul, AA, Cole, TJ, Wadsworth, EJ. Characteristics of the low-energy reporters in a longitudinal national dietary survey. Br. J. Nutr. 1997; 77: 833–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31Cole, TJ, Black, AE, Coward, WA, Prentice, AM. Total energy expenditure and basal metabolic rate. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 1996; 63: 281–2.Google Scholar
32Wheeler, C, Rutishauser, L, Conn, J, O'Dea, K. Reproducibility of a meal-based food frequency questionnaire. The influence of format and time interval between questionnaires. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 1994; 48: 795–809.Google ScholarPubMed
33Hayter, JE, Henry, CJK. A re-examination of basal metabolic rate predictive equations: the importance of geographic origin of subjects in sample selection. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 1994; 48: 702–7.Google ScholarPubMed
34Shetty, PS, Henry, CJK, Black, AE, Prentice, AM. Energy requirements of adults: an update on basal metabolic rates (BMRs) and physical activity levels (PALs). Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 1996; 50 (Suppl.): S11–23.Google ScholarPubMed
35Charlton, K, Wolmarans, P, Kruger, M, Labadarios, DL, Aronson, I, Lombard, CJ. Micronutrient status of older South Africans. S. Afr. Med. J. 1998; 88: 653–8.Google Scholar
36Goldberg, GR, Black, AE, Jebb, SA, et al. Critical evaluation of energy intake data using fundamental principles of energy physiology: I. Derivation of cut-off limits to identify under-recording. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 1991; 45: 569–81.Google Scholar
37Garrow, JS. Validation of methods for estimating habitual diet: proposed guidelines. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 1995; 49: 231–2.Google ScholarPubMed
38Southgate, DAT. On the quality of nutritional data. Br. J. Nutr. 1995; 73: 335–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar