Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T14:01:46.038Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dietary assessment methods for micronutrient intake: a systematic review on vitamins

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 January 2010

Patricia Henríquez-Sánchez ,
Almudena Sánchez-Villegas ,
Jorge Doreste-Alonso ,
Adriana Ortiz-Andrellucchi ,
Karina Pfrimer  and
Lluis Serra-Majem
Patricia Henríquez-Sánchez*
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, PO Box 550, 35080Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain
Almudena Sánchez-Villegas
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, PO Box 550, 35080Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain
Jorge Doreste-Alonso
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, PO Box 550, 35080Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain
Adriana Ortiz-Andrellucchi
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, PO Box 550, 35080Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain
Karina Pfrimer
Affiliation:
Division of General Internal and Geriatric Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Avenida Bandeirantes, 3900Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil
Lluis Serra-Majem
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, PO Box 550, 35080Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain Community Nutrition Research Centre of the Nutrition Research Foundation, University of Barcelona Science Park, Baldiri Reixac 4, 08028Barcelona, Spain
*
*Corresponding author: Patricia Henríquez-Sánchez, fax +34 928453475, email [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The EURRECA Network of Excellence is working towards the development of aligned micronutrient recommendations across Europe. The purpose of the present study was to define how to identify dietary intake validation studies in adults pertaining to vitamins. After establishing a search strategy, we conducted a MEDLINE and EMBASE literature review. A scoring system was developed to rate the quality of each validation study according to sample size, statistical methods, data collection procedure, seasonality and vitamin supplement use. This produced a quality index with possible scores obtained ranging from 0·5 to 7. Five thousand four-hundred and seventy-six papers were identified. The numbers meeting the inclusion criteria were: for vitamin A, 76; vitamin C, 108; vitamin D, 21; vitamin E, 75; folic acid, 47; vitamin B12, 19; vitamin B6, 21; thiamine, 49; riboflavin, 49; and niacin, 32. The most frequently used method to ascertain dietary intake was the Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ), whereas dietary records (DR) and 24-h recalls were the most used reference methods. The correlation coefficients (CC) between vitamin intakes estimated by FFQ and the reference method were weighted according to the study's quality index and ranged from 0·41 to 0·53 when the reference method was the DR and from 0·43 to 0·67 when the reference was 24-h recalls. A minority of studies (n 33) used biomarkers for validation and in these the CC ranged from 0·26 to 0·38. The FFQ is an acceptable method of assessing vitamin intake. The present review provides new insights regarding the characteristics that assessment methods for dietary intake should fulfil.

Keywords

Dietary assessmentFFQValidationVitamins
Type
Full Papers
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 102 , Issue S1 , December 2009 , pp. S10 - S37
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2010

There is ample evidence regarding the role of dietary factors on the development of different chronic diseases. Nevertheless, assessing dietary patterns both at the individual and population levels is a difficult task due to the extensive variability of intake.

Multiple methods have been described to ascertain nutrient intake, with the Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ) being the instrument of choice in large nutritional epidemiological studies. Two other dietary instruments that are commonly used are the 24-h dietary recall and the dietary record (DR). It is generally accepted that all these methods have advantages and limitations and none of them is entirely satisfactory.

A universal epidemiological method to ascertain individual dietary intake does not exist. All methods have some kind of errors, although these are not always of a similar magnitude. Thus, it is a difficult task to know what the best method consists of if all of them are imperfect. The objective of a validation method is to compare a nutritional assessment method with another considered as superior, but never as the absolute truth(Reference Willett, Lenart and Willett1). One of the most important issues for avoiding false interpretations is the independence of errors among the different methods evaluated.

Numerous validation studies designed to compare the available methods to assess dietary intake are cited in the scientific literature. The most frequently applied method to ascertain dietary intake is the FFQ, whereas DR and recalls are most utilised as reference methods. The diversity of the results obtained does not allow us to draw conclusions about the selection of an ideal dietary assessment method.

Thus, the aim of this analysis was to identify the most accurate method to assess vitamin intake in the adult population through an extensive review of the literature.

Material and methods

A MEDLINE and EMBASE literature search was carried out between July 2007 and March 2008. The procedure for the identification and selection of articles was performed in three steps:

At stage 1, a search strategy was established to identify the most relevant studies in the electronic databases.

The search terms used in the electronic databases were divided into two categorical strategies:

  1. (1) General. The MeSH terms applied in the general search were: nutrient terms (‘nutritional assessment’ OR ‘diet’ OR ‘nutritional status’ OR ‘dietary intake’ OR ‘food intake’); validity terms (‘validity’ OR ‘validation study’ OR ‘reproducibility’ OR ‘replication study’ OR ‘correlation coefficient’ OR ‘correlation study’) and human studies.

  2. (2) Vitamin specific. The MeSH terms applied were: nutrient terms (vitamin names and synonyms) and intake terms: (intake* OR diet).

At stage 2 of the review, titles and abstracts of the selected articles were read by two independent reviewers. Only when they both determined that titles/abstracts met the exclusion criteria were the articles excluded. When a title/abstract could not be rejected with certainty, the full text of the article was obtained and further evaluated. We applied the following exclusion criteria:

  1. (1) Articles exclusively assessing macronutrients and/or energy.

  2. (2) Studies describing the content of foods in nutrients, additives or contaminants.

  3. (3) Studies in diseased or institutionalised persons exclusively.

  4. (4) Articles presenting reference values for food consumption, nutrient intake, biochemical markers and anthropometric measurements.

  5. (5) Articles establishing associations between food consumption, nutrient intake, biological variables, biochemical markers and anthropometric measurements.

  6. (6) Studies relating diseases to food consumption or nutrient intake.

  7. (7) Intervention studies and other therapeutic studies with nutrients or drugs related to the metabolism of these nutrients.

  8. (8) Calibration studies and those discussing statistical methods.

  9. (9) Studies evaluating the physiological effects of foods, nutrients and in relation to their genetic determinants.

  10. (10) Studies in animals and those without abstracts in PubMed.

At stage 3, the following criteria were considered to select the articles for inclusion:

  1. (1) Studies regarding validation results for vitamin intake (those articles analysing only reproducibility or supplement use were excluded from the present analysis).

  2. (2) Studies based on the adult population (those articles based on children, adolescents, pregnant women or the elderly were excluded from the present analysis).

The full text of all articles collected was screened for definitive exclusion or data extraction by a different reviewer from those involved in the acceptance process, with independent duplicate assessment of a random sample of 25 % by a second reviewer. Where the two reviewers disagreed the study was discussed and a consensus decision reached where possible. If this was not possible, then a third reviewer was asked to arbitrate.

The articles included in the present study were categorised according to the total number of days over which the reference methods were applied:

  1. (1) Long-term intake. If the reference method was a dietary assessment method (including 24-h recall and estimated and weighed DR) applied 7 or more days.

  2. (2) Short-term intake. If the reference method was a dietary assessment method (including 24-h recall and estimated and weighed DR) applied less than 7 d.

  3. (3) Biomarker. If the reference method was a biomarker.

To assess the quality of the different validation studies, a quality score system was developed(Reference Serra-Majem, Frost Andersen and Henriquez- Sánchez2). The studies were scored considering its sample size, the statistics used to validate the method, the procedure of data collection, and the inclusion or not of seasonality and vitamin supplements use, according to the values described in Table 1. The CC obtained for each study were weighed in proportion to the article quality index.

Table 1 Quality criteria to score validation studies on micronutrient intake

SES, Socioeconomic status.

Results

Five thousand four-hundred and seventy-six articles were identified in the initial search strategy. After applying the exclusion criteria, 392 articles from the general search remained in the review. We applied the inclusion criteria in stage 3 obtaining the following articles for each vitamin: 76 articles for vitamin A; 108 for vitamin C; 21 for vitamin D; 75 for vitamin E; 47 for folic acid; 19 for vitamin B12; 21 for vitamin B6; 49 for thiamine; 49 for riboflavin: 30 for niacin, extracted from a total of 124 studies.

In the present review, most of the validation studies used a FFQ as the intake assessment method. For each vitamin, the methods used as gold standards to validate the FFQ are described in Table 2.

Table 2 Distribution of analyses by FFQ validation method and vitamin

To measure the validity of the different FFQ according to the type of reference method utilised, weighted means of the CC were calculated using the quality index value of each study as the weight (Table 3). Weighted CC for the FFQ ranged from 0·41 to 0·53 when the reference method was the DR, and from 0·43 to 0·67 when the recalls were utilised as the gold standard. Only a few studies (n 33) used biomarkers as a validation method, which yielded lower correlation values (coefficients between 0·26 and 0·38).

Table 3 Weighted mean correlation coefficients according to reference method used in FFQ validation for each vitamin

Tables 4–11 describe the purpose and scope of the literature examined in the present review: author and year of publication, population size (ranged from 20 to 860 persons) and sex (majority were females), characteristics of the FFQ (mode of administration, number of food items included in the questionnaire and reference period), characteristics of the reference method (collection of information and total number of days over which the reference method was applied), the use or not of supplements, the correlation coefficient and the quality index.

Table 4 Description of validation studies regarding vitamins A, C, D and E intake (FFQ vs. dietary records)

No., number; Suppl., supplements; W, women; M, men; DR, dietary record; 24-h R, 24-h recall.

* Age, sex and energy-adjusted, Pearson correlation coefficient.

† Crude, Spearman correlation coefficient.

‡ Crude, Pearson correlation coefficient.

§ Energy-adjusted, deattenuated correlation coefficient.

∥ Energy-adjusted, Spearman correlation coefficient.

Intra-class correlation coefficient.

** Energy-adjusted, Pearson correlation coefficient.

†† Low-food diversity.

‡‡ High-food diversity.

Table 5 Description of validation studies regarding vitamins A, C, D and E intake (FFQ vs. 24-h recalls)

No., number; Suppl., supplements; W, women; M, men.

* Energy-adjusted, deattenuated correlation coefficient.

† Energy-adjusted, Pearson correlation coefficient.

‡ Crude, Pearson correlation coefficient.

§ Crude, Spearman correlation coefficient.

Table 6 Description of validation studies regarding vitamins A, C, D and E intake (FFQ vs. biomarkers)

No, number; Suppl., supplements; W, women; M, men, Bl, black; Wh, white.

* Crude, Spearman correlation coefficient.

† Multivariable-adjusted correlation coefficient.

‡ Energy-adjusted, deattenuated correlation coefficient.

§ Energy-adjusted, Spearman correlation coefficient.

∥ Crude, Pearson correlation coefficient.

Table 7 Description of validation studies regarding vitamins A, C, D and E intake (Other methods)

No., number; Suppl., supplements; W, women; M, men; DR, dietary record; Bl, black; Wh, white*; (24-, 48-, 72-) h R, (24-, 48-, 72-) h recall.

* Multivariable-adjusted correlation coefficient.

† Crude, Spearman correlation coefficient.

‡ Energy-adjusted, Pearson correlation coefficient.

§ Intra-class correlation coefficient.

∥ Energy-adjusted, deattenuated correlation coefficient.

Energy-adjusted, Spearman correlation coefficient.

** Crude, Pearson correlation coefficient.

Table 8 Description of validation studies regarding folic acid and B vitamin intake (FFQ vs. dietary records)

No., number; Suppl., supplements; M, men; DR, dietary record; W, women; 24-h R, 24-h recall.

* Crude, Spearman correlation coefficient.

† Crude, Pearson correlation coefficient.

‡ Energy-adjusted, deattenuated correlation coefficient.

§ Energy-adjusted, Spearman correlation coefficient.

∥ Energy-adjusted, Pearson correlation coefficient.

Intra-class correlation coefficient.

‡‡ Age, sex and energy-adjusted, Pearson correlation coefficient.

** Low-food diversity.

†† High-food diversity.

Table 9 Description of validation studies regarding folic acid and B vitamin intake (FFQ vs. 24-h recalls)

No., number; Suppl., supplements; W, women; M, men.

* Energy-adjusted, deattenuated correlation coefficient.

† Crude, Pearson correlation coefficient.

‡ Crude, Spearman correlation coefficient.

Table 10 Description of validation studies regarding folic acid and B vitamin intake (FFQ vs. biomarkers)

No., number; Suppl., supplements; W, women; M, men; RBC, red blood cells.

* Crude, Pearson correlation coefficient.

† Multivariable-adjusted correlation coefficient.

‡ Energy-adjusted, deattenuated correlation coefficient.

§ Crude, Spearman correlation coefficient.

Table 11 Description of validation studies regarding folic acid and B vitamin intake (Other methods)

No., number; Suppl., supplements; W, women; M, men; DR, dietary record (no. of records/no. of days per record); (24-, 48-, 72-) h R, (24-, 48-, 72-) h recall; RBC, red blood cells.

* Crude, Spearman correlation coefficient.

† Energy-adjusted, deattenuated correlation coefficient.

‡ Intra-class correlation coefficient.

§ Multivariable-adjusted correlation coefficient.

FFQ v. dietary record

The DR was used as the gold standard in most of the validation studies included in the present systematic review. In the majority of the cases, information regarding dietary intake was collected through a self-administered FFQ (82 %) to assess dietary intake in the previous 12 months (58 %). The number of food items included in the questionnaire ranged between 22 and 350. The weighted CC varied according to the number of food items ( < 100 or ≥ 100 food items) included in the FFQ (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1 Weighted correlation coefficients for FFQ v. dietary record per vitamin and number of food items included in the FFQ. , foods < 100; , Foods ≥ 100.

Only 31 % of the studies included the intake of vitamin supplements in their analyses. There were no large differences in CC between studies that did or did not include information on vitamin supplements (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2 Weighted correlation coefficients distributed by vitamin supplement intake. , Supplement; , no supplement.

In 43·7 % of the cases, the CC were higher when the DR used as the reference method was a weighed DR compared to the use of an estimated DR (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3 Weighted correlation coefficients distributed by type of dietary record (weighed v. estimated dietary record). , estimated dietary record; , weighed dietary record.

Most of the DR used as reference methods collected dietary intake for 7 d or more (long-term intake; 74 % of the studies). Fig. 4 shows the difference in the weighted CC according to the number of days included in the DR (long- v. short-term intake).

Fig. 4 Weighted correlation coefficients distributed by number of days registered. , long-term intake; , short-term intake.

FFQ v. recall

When the reference method was the recall, information was more frequently collected through an interviewer-administered FFQ (50 %) instead of being self-administered by the study participants. The number of food items included in the FFQ ranged between 47 and 222. Fig. 5 shows the weighted CC according to the number of food items included in the FFQ.

Fig. 5 Weighted correlation coefficients for FFQ v. recall per vitamin and number of foods items included in the FFQ. , foods < 100; , foods ≥ 100.

The proportion of studies in this group including information about vitamin supplement intake was lower than that of those using DR as the gold standard (23 %). Indeed, there were no data on supplement intake for the B-complex vitamins with the exception of one study (Fig. 6).

Fig. 6 Weighted correlation coefficients distributed by vitamin supplement intake. Several vitamins were not included in the figure because of the small number of studies collecting vitamin supplement use. , supplements; , no supplements.

More than half of the recalls (55·6%) used to validate the FFQ collected dietary information during 7 days or more. When long-term intake was evaluated, the CC for the B-complex vitamins decreased (Fig. 7).

Fig. 7 Weighted correlation coefficients distributed by the number of days registered in the recalls. , long-term intake; , short-term intake.

FFQ v. biomarkers

The use of biomarkers as the reference method was less frequent, resulting in CC often much lower than 0·40. Folate intake collected through a FFQ was validated using serum folate in three studies. One study used erythrocyte folate as the reference method, and another three studies used both serum and erythrocyte folate as biomarkers. In fifteen studies, vitamin C intake was compared with its blood levels. Plasma concentration of vitamin E was used as the gold standard in seventeen studies validating vitamin E intake. Moreover, in four other studies, adipose tissue concentration was also used as biomarker.

Discussion

Our aim was to determine the comparative efficacy of available methods to validate dietary intake. The present review shows that FFQ are the most commonly used method for assessing diet in epidemiological studies. The main advantages are their low cost and their capability to characterise the usual diet in the past, as well as to minimise the risk of serious interviewer(Reference Willett, Lenart and Willett1) and measurement bias, given that they can be self-administered.

The drawbacks of the FFQ include the use of fixed lists of foods, the effect of memory, the difficulties in portion size estimation and the interpretation of questionnaires(Reference Willett, Lenart and Willett1, Reference Bingham, Nelson, Margetts and Nelson3). Among the available reference methods for the validation of FFQ, dietary records (DR) are likely to have the least correlated errors, whereas dietary histories as gold standards are considered the least appropriate(Reference Willett, Lenart and Willett1).

The validity of other methods was also evaluated. However, their relatively low number and the many different reference methods that were used led us to focus on FFQ. The vast majority of FFQ were self-administered. Despite the fact that data collection was simplified, their incompleteness is a serious handicap as well as their lack of precision, given the large interpersonal variability in diet recalls(Reference Bingham, Nelson, Margetts and Nelson3). In a review of FFQ validation studies, Cade et al. (Reference Cade, Thompson and Burley4) found that CC always improved, with the exception of vitamin C, when questionnaires were administered by an interviewer compared to those that were self-administered.

Time-frame concordance between FFQ and the reference method is even more crucial. The period of time which the dietary intake is referring to depends on the objectives of the study(Reference Nelson, Margetts and Nelson5). Usually, FFQ are designated to measure diet during the preceding year, whereas the reference methods do not cover the same time period. Multiple DR or recalls must be collected during the study period, and there is also a need to take into account seasonal variability, especially if we are interested in vitamin intakes, which are highly influenced by market availability. We have found that dietary intakes correlate better when the number of days covered by the reference method increases, except for B-complex vitamins when recall methods were used.

The order in which the FFQ and the reference method are applied is also decisive, considering that the results of the first measurement can affect those collected later on. We recommend that FFQ data be collected before gold standard measurement(Reference Nelson, Margetts and Nelson5). In many studies that were reviewed, FFQ were applied twice, before and alter the reference period for the gold standard, in order to evaluate its reproducibility. However, the results depend on the vitamins considered.

The number of foods included in the FFQ has been classically considered as a key component to assure validity of dietary intakes. Using a meta-analysis, Molag et al. (Reference Molag, de Vries and Ocké6) highlighted this point as the major determinant for ranking individuals according to their intakes. In the same vein, we have also found an improvement of the correlation when the numbers of food items surpassed 100: shorter questionnaires ( < 100 food items) yielded worse CC (mean 0·47) than those including more items (0·52), the latter having less variation as well.

However, it is also clear that the administration of longer FFQ is more expensive and participation rates may decrease. The use of extensive food lists is said to give less reliable results than shorter forms(Reference Willett, Lenart and Willett1), or even less information. The foods to be included in a FFQ should be restricted to those that are the principal source of the nutrient(s) of interest, and the frequency of their consumption must also be considered.

Supplements should be present in any dietary data assessment. We observed that data from FFQ and the reference method correlate better when specific questions about supplement intake are included, provided that they are asked for with the same emphasis. We stress the need to ask for the type and dosage of supplement use.

DR were the most commonly used reference method to validate the vitamin intakes measured by FFQ. We find narrower ranges of CC when DR are used, and so they may be less variable than recalls. Correlations are probably suboptimal when methods are used which share the inherent errors associated to FFQ, such as lack of memory and estimation of portion sizes.

Biomarker characteristics are responsible for the observed low correlations. Specifically, for vitamin C, plasma levels only show recent intake. Concerning vitamin E, for which more biomarker-based validation studies have been done, correlation is even worse, given that only four studied its level in adipose tissue, which is the more appropriate marker for usual vitamin E intake.

In any case, the highest correlation coefficient observed, weighed by quality, was 0·5. In light of this, we recommend the application of correction factors to any population-based nutrition study.

Acknowledgements

The studies reported herein have been carried out within the EURRECA Network of Excellence (www.eurreca.org), financially supported by the Commission of the European Communities, specific Research, Technology and Development (RTD) Programme Quality of Life and Management of Living Resources, within the Sixth Framework Programme, contract no. 036196. This report does not necessarily reflect the Commission's views or its future policy in this area. P. H.-S., A. S.-V. and J. D.-A. were responsible for designing search strategies, retrieving references, critical reading and evaluation, and for writing the article. A. O.-A. participated in retrieving references. K. P. participated in data gathering. L. S.-M. designed the analysis and presentation of data and supervised the article editing, which has been read and approved by all the authors. The authors have no conflict of interests to report.

References

1Willett, WC & Lenart, E (1998) Reproducibility and validity of food-frequency questionnaires. In Nutritional Epidemiology, 2nd ed., pp. 101–147 [Willett, WC, editor]. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2Serra-Majem, L, Frost Andersen, L, Henriquez- Sánchez, P, et al. (2009) Evaluating the quality of dietary intake validation studies. Br J Nut 102, Suppl. 1, S3–S9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3Bingham, SA & Nelson, M (1991) Assessment of food consumption and nutrient intake. InDesign Concepts in Nutritional Epidemiology, pp. 153–191 [Margetts, BM and Nelson, M, editors]. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications.Google Scholar
4Cade, J, Thompson, R, Burley, V, et al. (2001) Development validation and utilisation of a food-frequency questionnaire – a review. Public Health Nutr 5, 567–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5Nelson, M (1991) The validation of dietary questionnaire. InDesign Concepts in Nutritional Epidemiology, pp. 266–296 [Margetts, BM and Nelson, M, editors]. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications.Google Scholar
6Molag, ML, de Vries, JH, Ocké, MC, et al. (2007) Design characteristics of food questionnaire in relation to their validity. Am J Epidemiol 166, 1468–1478.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7Ambrosini, GL, De Klerk, NH, Musk, AW, et al. (2001) Agreement between a brief food frequency questionnaire and diet records using two statistical methods. Public Health Nutr 4, 255–264.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8Andersen, LF, Solvoll, K, Johansson, LR, et al. (1999) Evaluation of a food frequency questionnaire with weighed records, fatty acids, and alpha-tocopherol in adipose tissue and serum. Am J Epidemiol 150, 75–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9Bautista, L, Herrán, O, Pryer, J, et al. (2005) Development and simulated validation of a food-frequency questionnaire for the Colombian population. Public Health Nutr 8, 181–188.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10Blalock, SJ, Norton, LL, Patel, LA, et al. (2003) Development and assessment of a short instrument for assessing dietary intakes for calcium and vitamin D. J Am Pharm Assoc 43, 685–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11Block, G, Woods, M, Potosky, A, et al. (1990) Validation of a self-administered diet history questionnaire using multiple diet record. J Clin Epidemiol 43, 1327–1335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12Block, G, Thompson, FE, Hartman, AM, et al. (1992) Comparison of two dietary questionnaires validated against multiple dietary records collected during a 1-year period. J Am Diet Assoc 92, 686–693.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13Bonifacj, C, Gerber, M, Scali, J, et al. (1997) 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 51, 217–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14Brunner, E, Stallone, D, Juneja, M, et al. (2001) Dietary assessment in Whitehall II: comparison of 7 d diet diary and food-frequency questionnaire and validity against biomarkers. Br J Nutr 86, 405–414.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15Cardoso, MA, Kida, AA, Tomita, LY, et al. (2001) Reproducibility and validity of a food frequency questionnaire among women of a Japanese ancestry living in Brazil. Nutr Res 21, 725–733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16Chen, Y, Ahsan, H, Parvez, F, et al. (2004) Validity of a food-frequency questionnaire for a large prospective cohort study in Bangladesh. Br J Nutr 92, 851–859.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17Date, CH, Fukui, M, Yamamoto, A, et al. (2005) Reproducibility and validity of a self-administered food frequency questionnaire used in the JACC study. J Epidemiol 15, Suppl. 1, S9–S23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18Decarli, A, Franceschi, S, Ferraroni, M, et al. (1996) Validation of a food-frequency questionnaire to assess dietary intakes in cancer studies in Italy. Results for specific nutrients. Ann Epidemiol 6, 110–118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19Egami, I, Wakai, K, Kato, K, et al. (1999) A simple food frequency questionnaire for Japanese diet – Part II. Reproducibility and validity for nutrient intakes. J Epidemiol 9, 227–234.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20Engle, A, Lunn, LL, Koury, K, et al. (1990) Reproducibility and comparability of a computerized self-administered food frequency questionnaire. Nutr Cancer 13, 281–292.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21Friis, S, Krüger Kjaer, S, Stripp, C, et al. (1997) Reproducibility and relative validity of a self-administered semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire applied to younger women. J Clin Epidemiol 50, 303–311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22Hodge, A, Patterson, A, Brown, WJ, et al. (2000) The Anti Cancer Council of Victoria FFQ: relative validity of nutrient intakes compared with weighed food records in young to middle-aged women in a study of iron supplementation. Aust N Z J Public Health 24, 576–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23Ishihara, J, Sobue, T, Yamamoto, S, et al. (2003) Validity and reproducibility of a self-administered food frequency questionnaire in the JPC Study Cohort II: study design, participant profile and results in comparison with Cohort I. J Epidemiol 13, Suppl. 1, S134–S147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24Jain, M, Howe, GR & Rohan, T (1996) Dietary assessment in epidemiology: comparison of a food frequency and diet history questionnaire with a 7-day food record. Am J Epidemiol 143, 953–960.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25Jain, M & McLaughlin, J (2000) Validity of nutrient estimates by food frequency questionnaires based either on exact frequencies or categories. Ann Epidemiol 10, 354–360.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26Kelemen, LE, Anand, SS, Vuksan, V, et al. (2003) Development and evaluation of cultural food frequency questionnaires for South Asians, Chinese and Europeans in North America. J Am Diet Assoc 103, 1178–1184.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
27Kim, J, Chan, MM & Shore, RE (2002) Development and validation of a food frequency questionnaire for Korean Americans. Int J Food Sci Nutr 53, 129–142.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28Kobayashi, M, Sasaki, S & Tsugane, S (2003) Validity of a self-administered food frequency questionnaire used in the 5-year follow-up survey of the JPHC study cohort I to assess carotenoids and vitamin C intake: comparison with dietary records and blood level. J Epidemiol 13, Suppl. 1, S82–S91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
29Lee, MS, Pan, WH, Liu, KL, et al. (2006) Reproducibility and validity of a Chinese food frequency questionnaire used in Taiwan. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr 15, 161–169.Google ScholarPubMed
30MacIntyre, UE, Venter, CS & Vorster, HH (2001) A culture-sensitive quantitative food frequency questionnaire used in a African population: 2. Relative validation by 7-day weighed records and biomarkers. Public Health Nutr 4, 63–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31Männistö, S, Virtanen, M, Mikkonen, T, et al. (1996) Reproducibility and validity of a food frequency questionnaire in a case-control study on breast cancer. J Clin Epidemiol 49, 401–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32Marks, GC, Hughes, MC & van der Pols, JC (2006) The effect of personal characteristics on the validity of nutrient intake estimates using a food-frequency questionnaire. Public Health Nutr 9, 394–402.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
33Martín-Moreno, JM, Boyle, P, Gorgojo, L, et al. (1993) Development and validation of a food frequency questionnaire in Spain. Int J Epidemiol 22, 512–519.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
34McKeown, NM, Day, NE, Welch, AA, et al. (2001) Use of biological markers to validate self-reported dietary intake in a random sample of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer United Kingdom Norfolk cohort. Am J Clin Nutr 74, 188–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35McNaughton, SA, Marks, GC, Gaffney, P, et al. (2005) Validation of a food-frequency questionnaire assessment of carotenoid and vitamin E intake using weighed food records and plasma biomarkers: the method of triads model. Eur J Clin Nutr 59, 211–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
36Nagata, C, Ohwaki, A, Kurisu, Y, et al. (1998) Food diversity and validity of semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire. J Epidemiol 8, 297–301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
37Ogawa, K, Tsubono, Y, Nishino, Y, et al. (2003) Validation of a food frequency questionnaire for cohort studies in rural Japan. Public Health Nutr 6, 147–157.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
38Patterson, RE, Kristal, AR, Tinker, LF, et al. (1999) Measurement characteristics of the Women's Health Initiative food frequency questionnaire. Ann Epidemiol 9, 178–187.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
39Pietinen, P, Hartman, AM, Haapa, E, et al. (1998a) Reproducibility and validity of dietary assessment instruments. I. A self-administered food use questionnaire with a portion size picture booklet. Am J Epidemiol 128, 655–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
40Pietinen, P, Hartman, AM, Haapa, E, et al. (1998b) Reproducibility and validity of dietary assessment instruments. II. A qualitative food frequency questionnaire. Am J Epidemiol 128, 667–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
41Potischman, N, Carroll, RJ, Iturria, SJ, et al. (1999) Comparison of the 60- and 100-item NCI-Block questionnaires with validation data. Nutr Cancer 34, 70–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
42Potosky, AL, Block, G & Hartman, MS (1990) The apparent validity of diet questionnaires is influenced by number of diet-records days used for comparison. J Am Diet Assoc 90, 810–813.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
43Riboli, E, Elmståhl, S, Saracci, R, et al. (1997) The Malmö Food Study: validity of two dietary assessment methods for measuring nutrient intake. Int J Epidemiol 26, Suppl. 1, S161–S173.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
44Rimm, EB, Giovannucci, EL, Stampfer, MJ, et al. (1992) Reproducibility and validity of an expanded self-administered semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire among male health professionals. Am J Epidemiol 135, 1114–1126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
45Roddam, AW, Spencer, E, Banks, E, et al. (2005) Reproducibility of a short semi-quantitative food group questionnaire and its performance in estimating nutrient intake compared with a 7-day diet diary in the Million Women Study. Public Health Nutr 8, 201–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
46Shimizu, H, Ohwaki, A, Kurisu, Y, et al. (1999) Validity and reproducibility of a quantitative food frequency questionnaire for a cohort study in Japan. Jpn J Clin Oncol 29, 38–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
47Tjonneland, A, Haraldsdottir, J, Overvad, K, et al. (1992) Influence of individually estimated portion size data on the validity of a semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire. Int J Epidemiol 21, 770–777.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
48Tokudome, S, Imaeda, N, Tokudome, Y, et al. (2001) Relative validity of a semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire versus 28 day weighed diet records in Japanese female dietitians. Eur J Clin Nutr 55, 735–742.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
49Tsubono, Y, Ogawa, K, Watanabe, Y, et al. (2001) Food frequency questionnaire as a screening test. Nutr Cancer 39, 78–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
50Tsubono, Y, Sasaki, S, Kobayashi, M, et al. (2001) Food composition and empirical weight methods in predicting nutrient intakes from food frequency questionnaire. Ann Epidemiol 11, 213–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
51Tsugane, S, Kobayashi, M & Sasaki, S (2003) Validation of the self-administered food frequency questionnaire used in the 5-year follow-up survey of the JPHC study cohort I: comparison with dietary records for main nutrients. J Epidemiol 13, Suppl. 1, S51–S56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
52Willett, WC, Sampson, L, Stampfer, MJ, et al. (1985) Reproducibility and validity of a semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire. Am J Epidemiol 122, 51–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
53Willett, WC, Reynolds, RD, Cottrell-Hoehner, S, et al. (1987) Validation of a semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire: comparison with a 1-year diet record. J Am Diet Assoc 87, 43–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
54Baumgartner, K, Gilliland, FD, Nicholson, CS, et al. (1998) Validity and reproducibility of a food frequency questionnaire among Hispanic and non-Hispanic white women in New Mexico. Ethn Dis 8, 81–92.Google ScholarPubMed
55Fregapane, G & Asensio-García, C (2000) Dietary assessment of an educated young Spanish population using a self-administered meal-based food frequency questionnaire. Eur J Epidemiol 16, 183–191.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
56George, GC, Milani, TJ, Hanss-Nuss, H, et al. (2004) Development and validation of a semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire for young adult women in the south western United States. Nutr Res 24, 29–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
57Goulet, J, Nadeau, G, Lapointe, A, et al. (2004) Validity and reproducibility of an interviewer-administered food frequency questionnaire for healthy French-Canadian men and women. Nutr J 3, 13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
58Hartwell, DL & Henry, CJK (2001) Comparison of a self-administered quantitative food amount frequency questionnaire with 4-day estimated food records. Int J Food Sci Nutr 52, 151–159.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
59Ke, L, Toshiro, T, Fengyan, S, et al. (2005) Relative validity of a semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire versus 3 day weighed diet records in middle-aged inhabitants in Chaoshan area, China. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 6, 376–381.Google ScholarPubMed
60Kristal, AR, Feng, Z, Coates, RJ, et al. (1997) Associations of race/ethnicity education and dietary intervention with the validity and reliability of a food frequency questionnaire. Am J Epidemiol 146, 856–869.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
61Kumanyika, SK, Mauger, D, Mitchell, DC, et al. (2003) Relative validity of food frequency questionnaire nutrient estimates in the Black Women's Health Study. Ann Epidemiol 13, 111–118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
62Longnecker, M, Lissner, L, Holden, J, et al. (1993) The reproducibility and validity of a self-administered semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire in subjects from south Dakota and Wyoming. Epidemiology 4, 356–365.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
63Martínez, ME, Marshall, JR, Graver, E, et al. (1999) Reliability and validity of a self-administered food frequency questionnaire in a chemoprevention trial of adenoma recurrence. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 8, 941–946.Google Scholar
64Masson, LF, McNeill, G, Tomany, JO, et al. (2003) Statistical approaches for assessing the relative validity of a food-frequency questionnaire: use of correlation coefficients and the kappa statistic. Public Health Nutr 6, 313–321.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
65Moreira, P, Sampaio, D & Almeida, MD (2003) Validity assessment of a food frequency questionnaire by comparison with a 4-day diet record. Acta Med Port 16, 412–420.Google ScholarPubMed
66Paalanen, L, Männistö, S, Virtanen, MJ, et al. (2006) Validity of a food frequency questionnaire varied by age and body mass index. J Clin Epidemiol 59, 994–1001.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
67Parr, CL, Barikmon, I, Torheim, LE, et al. (2002) Validation of the second version of a quantitative food-frequency questionnaire for use in Western Mali. Public Health Nutr 5, 769–781.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
68Sasaki, S, Yanagibori, R, Amano, K, et al. (1998) Self-administered diet history questionnaire developed for health education: a relative validation of the test-version by comparison with 3-day diet record in women. J Epidemiol 8, 203–215.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
69Sauvaget, C, Allen, N, Hayashi, M, et al. (2002) Validation of a food frequency questionnaire in the Hiroshima/Nagasaki life span study. J Epidemiol 12, 394–401.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
70Schröder, H, Covas, MI, Marrugat, J, et al. (2001) Use of a three-day estimated food record, a 72-hour recall and a food-frequency questionnaire for dietary assessment in a Mediterranean Spanish population. Clin Nutr 20, 429–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
71Tokudome, S, Goto, Ch, Imaeda, N, et al. (2005) Relative validity of a short food frequency questionnaire for assessing nutrient intake versus three-day weighed diet records in middle-aged Japanese. J Epidemiol 15, 135–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
72Boeing, H, Bohlscheid-Thomas, S, Voss, S, et al. (1997) The relative validity of vitamin intakes derived from a food frequency questionnaire compared to 24-hour recalls and biological measurements: results from the EPIC Pilot Study in Germany. Int J Epidemiol 26, Suppl. 1, S62–S90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
73Fraser, GE, Butler, TL, Shavlik, D, et al. (2005) Correlations between estimated and true dietary intakes: using two instrumental variables. Ann Epidemiol 15, 509–518.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
74Gnardellis, C, Trichopoulou, A, Katsouyanni, K, et al. (1994) Reproducibility and validity of an extensive semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire among Greek school teachers. Epidemiology 6, 74–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
75Hebert, JR, Gupta, PC, Bhonsle, RB, et al. (1998) Development and testing of a quantitative food frequency questionnaire for use in Kerala, India. Public Health Nutr 1, 123–130.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
76Hernández-Ávila, M, Romieu, I, Parra, S, et al. (1998) Validity and reproducibility of a food frequency questionnaire to assess dietary intake of women living in Mexico City. Salud Publica Mex 40, 133–140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
77Jackson, M, Walker, S, Cade, J, et al. (2001) Reproducibility and validity of a quantitative food-frequency questionnaire among Jamaicans of Africa origin. Public Health Nutr 4, 971–980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
78Johansson, I, Hallmans, G, Biessy, C, et al. (2001) Validation and calibration of food-frequency questionnaire measurements in the Northern Sweden Health and Disease cohort. Public Health Nutr 5, 487–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
79Kabagambe, EK, Baylin, A, Allan, DA, et al. (2001) Application of the method of triads to evaluate the performance of food frequency questionnaires and biomarkers as indicators of long-term dietary intake. Am J Epidemiol 154, 1126–1135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
80Katsouyanni, K, Rimm, EB, Gnardellis, CH, et al. (1997) Reproducibility and relative validity of an extensive semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire using dietary records and biochemical markers among Greek schoolteachers. Int J Epidemiol 26, Suppl. 1, S118–S127.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
81Malekshah, AF, Kimiagar, M, Saadatian-Elahi, M, et al. (2006) Validity and reliability of a new food frequency questionnaire compared to 24h recalls and biochemical measurements: pilot phase of Golestan cohort study of esophageal cancer. Eur J Clin Nutr 60, 971–977.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
82Mayer-Davis, EJ, Vitolins, MZ, Carmichael, SL, et al. (1999) Validity and reproducibility of a food frequency interview in a multi-cultural epidemiologic study. Ann Epidemiol 9, 314–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
83Messerer, M, Johansson, SE & Wolk, A (2004) The validity of questionnaire-based micronutrient intake estimates is increased by including dietary supplement use in Swedish men. J Nutr 134, 1800–1805.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
84Ocké, MC, Bueno-de-Mesquita, HB, Pols, MA, et al. (1997) The Dutch EPIC food frequency questionnaire. II. Relative validity and reproducibility for nutrients. Int J Epidemiol 26, Suppl. 1, S49–S58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
85Pisani, P, Faggiano, F, Krogh, V, et al. (1997) Relative validity and reproducibility of a food frequency dietary questionnaire for use in the Italian EPIC centres. Int J Epidemiol 26, Suppl. 1, S152–S160.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
86Romieu, I, Parra, S, Hernández, JF, et al. (1999) Questionnaire assessment of antioxidant and retinol intakes in Mexican women. Arch Med Res 30, 224–239.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
87Sevak, L, Mangtani, P, McCormack, V, et al. (2004) Validation of a food frequency questionnaire to assess macro- and micro-nutrient intake among South Asians in the United Kingdom. Eur J Nutr 43, 160–168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
88Shu, O, Yang, G, Jin, F, et al. (2004) Validity and reproducibility of the food frequency questionnaires used in the Shanghai Women's Health Study. Eur J Clin Nutr 58, 17–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
89Van Liere, MJ, Lucas, F, Clavel, F, et al. (1997) Relative validity and reproducibility of a French dietary history questionnaire. Int J Epidemiol 26, Suppl. 1, S128–S136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
90Villegas, R, Yang, G, Liu, D, et al. (2006) Validity and reproducibility of the food frequency questionnaire used in the Shangai Men's Health Study. Br J Nutr 97, 993–1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
91Block, G, Wakimoto, P, Jensen, C, et al. (2006) Validation of a food frequency questionnaire for Hispanics. Prev Chronic Dis 3, 77A.Google ScholarPubMed
92Boucher, B, Cotterchio, M, Kreiger, N, et al. (2006) Validity and reliability of the Block98 food-frequency questionnaire in a sample of Canadian women. Public Health Nutr 9, 84–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
93Flagg, EW, Coates, RJ, Calle, EE, et al. (2000) Validation of the American Cancer Society Cancer Prevention Study II Nutrition Survey Cohort Food Frequency Questionnaire. Epidemiology 11, 462–468.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
94Fornés, NS, Stringhini, ML & Elias, BM (2003) Reproducibility and validity of a food-frequency questionnaire for use among low-income Brazilian workers. Public Health Nutr 6, 821–827.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
95Hebert, JR, Gupta, PC, Bhonsle, RB, et al. (1999) Development and testing of a quantitative food frequency questionnaire for use in Gujarat, India. Public Health Nutr 2, 39–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
96Kusama, K, Le, DS, Hanh, TT, et al. (2005) Reproducibility and validity of a food frequency questionnaire among Vietnamese in Ho Chi Minh City. J Am Coll Nutr 24, 466–473.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
97Munger, RG, Folsom, AR, Kushi, LH, et al. (1992) Dietary assessment of older Iowa women with a food frequency questionnaire: nutrient intake, reproducibility, and comparison with 24-hour dietary recall interviews. Am J Epidemiol 136, 192–200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
98Navarro, A, Osella, AR, Guerra, V, et al. (2001) Reproducibility and validity of a food-frequency questionnaire in assessing dietary intakes and food habits in epidemiological cancer studies in Argentina. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 20, 365–370.Google ScholarPubMed
99Olafsdottir, AS, Thorsdottir, I, Gunnarsdottir, I, et al. (2006) Comparison of women's diet assessed by FFQs and 24-hour recalls with and without underreporters: associations with biomarkers. Ann Nutr Metab 50, 450–460.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
100Rodríguez, MM, Méndez, H, Torún, B, et al. (2002) Validation of a semi-quantitative food-frequency questionnaire for use among adults in Guatemala. Public Health Nutr 5, 691–698.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
101Segovia-Siapco, G, Singh, P, Jaceldo-Siegl, K, et al. (2007) Validation of a food-frequency questionnaire for measurement of nutrient intake in a dietary intervention study. Public Health Nutr 10, 177–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
102Shai, I, Rosner, BA, Shahar, DR, et al. (2005) Dietary evaluation and attenuation of relative risk: multiple comparisons between blood and urinary biomarkers, food frequency, and 24-hour recall questionnaires: the DEARR study. J Nutr 135, 573–579.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
103Sichieri, R & Everhart, JE (1998) Validity of a Brazilian food frequency questionnaire against dietary recalls and estimated energy intakes. Nutr Res 18, 1649–1659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
104Sudha, V, Radhika, G, Sathya, RM, et al. (2006) Reproducibility and validity of an interviewer-administered semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire to assess dietary intake of urban adults in southern India. Int J Food Sci Nutr 57, 481–493.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
105Ascherio, A, Stampfer, MJ, Colditz, GA, et al. (1992) Correlations of vitamin A and E intakes with the plasma concentrations of carotenoids and tocopherols among American men and women. J Nutr 122, 1792–1801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
106Bingham, SA, Gill, C, Welch, A, et al. (1997) Validation of dietary assessment methods in the UK arm of EPIC using weighed records, and 24-hour urinary nitrogen and potassium and serum vitamin C and carotenoids and biomarkers. Int J Epidemiol 26, Suppl. 1, S137–S151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
107Bodner, CH, Soutar, A, New, SA, et al. (1998) Validation of a food frequency questionnaire for use in a Scottish population: correlation of antioxidant vitamin intakes with biochemical measures. J Hum Nutr Diet 11, 373–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
108Bolton-Smith, C, Casey, CE, Gey, KF, et al. (1991) Antioxidant vitamin intakes assessed using a food frequency questionnaire: correlation with biochemical status in smokers and non-smokers. Br J Nutr 65, 337–436.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
109Coates, RJ & Monteilh, CP (1997) Assessment of food frequency questionnaires in minority populations. Am J Clin Nutr 65, Suppl. 4, S1108–S1115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
110Dixon, LB, Subar, AF, Wideroff, L, et al. (2006) Carotenoid and tocopherol estimates from the NCI diet history questionnaire are valid compared with multiple recalls and serum biomarkers. J Nutr 136, 3054–3061.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
111El-Sohemy, A, Baylin, A, Ascherio, A, et al. (2001) Population-based study of α- and γ-tocopherol in plasma and adipose tissue as biomarkers of intake in Costa Rica adults. Am J Clin Nutr 74, 356–363.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
112Jacques, PF, Sulsky, SI, Sadowski, JA, et al. (1993) Comparison of micronutrient intake measured by a dietary questionnaire and biochemical indicators of micronutrient status. Am J Clin Nutr 57, 182–189.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
113Kardinaal, AF, van't Veer, P, Brants, HA, et al. (1995) Relations between antioxidant vitamins in adipose tissue, plasma, and diet. Am J Epidemiol 141, 440–450.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
114Knutsen, SF, Fraser, GE, Linsted, KD, et al. (2001) Comparing biological measurements of vitamin C, folate, alpha-tocopherol and carotene with 24-hour dietary recall information in nonhispanic blacks and whites. Ann Epidemiol 11, 406–416.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
115Marshall, JR, Lanza, E, Bloch, A, et al. (1997) Indexes of food nutrient intakes as predictors of serum concentrations of nutrients: the problem of inadequate discriminant validity. Am J Clin Nutr 65, Suppl. 4, S1269–S1274.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
116Porrini, M, Gentile, MG & Fidanza, F (1995) Biochemical validation of a self-administered semi-quantitative food-frequency questionnaire. Br J Nutr 74, 323–333.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
117Sinha, R, Block, G & Taylor, PR (1992) Determinants of plasma ascorbic acid in a healthy male population. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1, 297–302.Google Scholar
118Willet, WC, Stampfer, MJ & Underwood, BA (1983) Validation of a dietary questionnaire with plasma carotenoid and (alpha)-tocopherol levels. Am J Clin Nutr 38, 631–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
119Bingham, SA, Gill, C, Welch, A, et al. (1994) Comparison of dietary assessment methods in nutritional epidemiology: weighed records v. 24 h recalls, food-frequency questionnaires and estimated-diet records. Br J Nutr 72, 619–643.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
120Booth, SL, Tucker, KL, McKeown, NM, et al. (1997) Relationships between dietary intakes and fasting plasma concentrations of fat-soluble vitamins in humans. J Nutr 127, 587–592.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
121EPIC Group of Spain (1997) Relative validity and reproducibility of a diet history questionnaire in Spain. II. Nutrients. Int J Epidemiol 26, Suppl. 1, S100–S109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
122EPIC Group of Spain (1997) Relative validity and reproducibility of a diet history questionnaire in Spain. III. Biochemical markers. Int J Epidemiol 26, Suppl. 1, S110–S117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
123Hankin, JH, Wilkens, LR, Kolonel, LN, et al. (1991) Validation on a quantitative diet history method in Hawaii. Am J Epidemiol 133, 616–628.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
124Hebert, JR, Hurley, T, Chiriboga, D, et al. (1998) A comparison of selected nutrient intakes derived from three diet assessment methods used in a low-fat maintenance trial. Public Health Nutr 1, 207–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
125Matthys, C, Pynaert, I, Roe, M, et al. (2004) Validity and reproducibility of a computerised tool for assessing the iron, calcium and vitamin C intake of Belgian women. Eur J Clin Nutr 58, 1297–1305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
126Sasaki, S, Ushio, F, Amano, K, et al. (2000) Serum biomarker-based validation of a self-administered diet history questionnaire for Japanese subjects. J Nutr Sci Vitaminol (Tokyo) 46, 285–296.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
127Smith, CJ, Nelson, RG, Hardy, SA, et al. (1996) Survey of the diet of Pima Indians using quantitative food frequency assessment and 24-hour recall. J Am Diet Assoc 96, 778–784.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
128Takatsuka, N, Kurisu, Y, Nagata, C, et al. (1997) Validation of simplified diet history questionnaire. J Epidemiol 7, 33–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
129Flood, V, Smith, WT, Webb, KL, et al. (2004) Issues in assessing the validity of nutrient data obtained from a food-frequency questionnaire: folate and vitamin B12 examples. Public Health Nutr 7, 751–756.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
130Ishihara, J, Yamamoto, S, Iso, H, et al. (2005) Validity of a self-administered food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) and its generalizability to the estimation of dietary folate intake in Japan. Nutr J 4, 26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
131Bacardi-Gascón, M, Ley y de Góngora, S, Castro-Vázquez, BY, et al. (2003) Validation of a semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire to assess folate status. Results discriminate a high-risk group of women residing on the Mexico-U.S. border. Arch Med Res 34, 325–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
132French, MR, Langdon, C, Levy-Milne, R, et al. (2001) Development of a validated food frequency questionnaire to determine folate intake. Can J Diet Pract Res 62, 82–86.Google ScholarPubMed
133Torheim, LE, Barikmo, I, Hatloy, A, et al. (2001) Validation of a quantitative food frequency questionnaire for use in western Mali. Public Health Nutr 4, 1267–1277.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
134Verkleij-Hagoort, AC, de Vries, JHM, Stegers, MPG, et al. (2007) Validation of the assessment of folate and vitamin B12 intake in women of reproductive age: the method of triads. Eur J Clin Nutr 61, 610–615.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
135Drogan, D, Klipstein-Grobusch, K, Wans, S, et al. (2004) Plasma folate as marker of folate status in epidemiological studies: the European Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)-Postdam study. Br J Nutr 92, 489–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
136Hickling, S, Knuiman, M, Jamrozik, K, et al. (2005) A rapid dietary assessment to determine intake of folate was developed and validated. J Clin Epidemiol 58, 802–808.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
137Pufulete, M, Emery, PW, Nelson, M, et al. (2002) Validation of a short food frequency questionnaire to assess folate intake. Br J Nutr 87, 383–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
138Yen, J, Zoumas-Mourse, C, Pakiz, B, et al. (2003) Folate intake assessment: validation of a new approach. J Am Diet Assoc 103, 991–1000.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Table 1 Quality criteria to score validation studies on micronutrient intake

Figure 1

Table 2 Distribution of analyses by FFQ validation method and vitamin

Figure 2

Table 3 Weighted mean correlation coefficients according to reference method used in FFQ validation for each vitamin

Figure 3

Table 4 Description of validation studies regarding vitamins A, C, D and E intake (FFQ vs. dietary records)

Figure 4

Table 5 Description of validation studies regarding vitamins A, C, D and E intake (FFQ vs. 24-h recalls)

Figure 5

Table 6 Description of validation studies regarding vitamins A, C, D and E intake (FFQ vs. biomarkers)

Figure 6

Table 7 Description of validation studies regarding vitamins A, C, D and E intake (Other methods)

Figure 7

Table 8 Description of validation studies regarding folic acid and B vitamin intake (FFQ vs. dietary records)

Figure 8

Table 9 Description of validation studies regarding folic acid and B vitamin intake (FFQ vs. 24-h recalls)

Figure 9

Table 10 Description of validation studies regarding folic acid and B vitamin intake (FFQ vs. biomarkers)

Figure 10

Table 11 Description of validation studies regarding folic acid and B vitamin intake (Other methods)

Figure 11

Fig. 1 Weighted correlation coefficients for FFQ v. dietary record per vitamin and number of food items included in the FFQ. , foods < 100; , Foods ≥ 100.

Figure 12

Fig. 2 Weighted correlation coefficients distributed by vitamin supplement intake. , Supplement; , no supplement.

Figure 13

Fig. 3 Weighted correlation coefficients distributed by type of dietary record (weighed v. estimated dietary record). , estimated dietary record; , weighed dietary record.

Figure 14

Fig. 4 Weighted correlation coefficients distributed by number of days registered. , long-term intake; , short-term intake.

Figure 15

Fig. 5 Weighted correlation coefficients for FFQ v. recall per vitamin and number of foods items included in the FFQ. , foods < 100; , foods ≥ 100.

Figure 16

Fig. 6 Weighted correlation coefficients distributed by vitamin supplement intake. Several vitamins were not included in the figure because of the small number of studies collecting vitamin supplement use. , supplements; , no supplements.

Figure 17

Fig. 7 Weighted correlation coefficients distributed by the number of days registered in the recalls. , long-term intake; , short-term intake.