We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
To validate a fat intake questionnaire (FIQ) developed to assess habitual dietary intake while focusing on the assessment of detailed fatty acid intake including total trans unsaturated fatty acids (TUFA).
Design
An 88 food item/food group FIQ was developed using a meal pattern technique. Validation was achieved by comparison with dietary intake assessed by a modified diet history (DH) in a cross-over design. Eighty-four individuals supplied adipose tissue biopsies for linoleic acid and total TUFA analysis as an independent validation of the FIQ and DH.
Setting
Medical Centre, Dublin Airport, Republic of Ireland.
Subjects
One hundred and five healthy volunteers (43 females and 62 males aged 23–63 years).
Results
Significant correlations (P < 0.0005) were achieved for intakes of energy (0.78), total fat (0.77), saturated fat (0.77), monounsaturated fat (0.63), polyunsaturated fat (0.73), TUFA (0.67) and linoleic acid (0.71) assessed by the FIQ compared with the DH. Linoleic acid intake assessed by the FIQ and the DH was significantly correlated with adipose tissue concentrations (r = 0.58 and 0.49, respectively; P<0.005); however, total TUFA intake was poorly correlated with adipose tissue concentrations (r = 0.17 and 0.10 for FIQ and DH, respectively).
Conclusions
The FIQ compared favourably with the DH in assessing habitual diet, in particular fatty acid intake. In addition, the FIQ was successfully validated against the linoleic acid composition of adipose tissue, an independent biomarker of relative fatty acid status. The FIQ could therefore be used as an alternative to the DH as it is a shorter, less labour-intensive method.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.