Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Validity and reliability of an online self-repo...

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Validity and reliability of an online self-report 24-h dietary recall method (Intake24): a doubly labelled water study and repeated-measures analysis

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Validity and reliability of an online self-report 24-h dietary recall method (Intake24): a doubly labelled water study and repeated-measures analysis. / Foster, Emma; Lee, Clement; Imamura, Fumiaki et al.
In: Journal of Nutritional Science, Vol. 8, e29, 30.09.2019.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Foster, E, Lee, C, Imamura, F, Hollidge, SE, Westgate, KL, Venables, MC, Poliakov, I, Rowland, MK, Osadchiy, T, Bradley, JC, Simpson, EL, Adamson, AJ, Olivier, P, Wareham, N, Forouhi, NG & Brage, S 2019, 'Validity and reliability of an online self-report 24-h dietary recall method (Intake24): a doubly labelled water study and repeated-measures analysis', Journal of Nutritional Science, vol. 8, e29. https://doi.org/10.1017/jns.2019.20

APA

Foster, E., Lee, C., Imamura, F., Hollidge, S. E., Westgate, K. L., Venables, M. C., Poliakov, I., Rowland, M. K., Osadchiy, T., Bradley, J. C., Simpson, E. L., Adamson, A. J., Olivier, P., Wareham, N., Forouhi, N. G., & Brage, S. (2019). Validity and reliability of an online self-report 24-h dietary recall method (Intake24): a doubly labelled water study and repeated-measures analysis. Journal of Nutritional Science, 8, Article e29. https://doi.org/10.1017/jns.2019.20

Vancouver

Foster E, Lee C, Imamura F, Hollidge SE, Westgate KL, Venables MC et al. Validity and reliability of an online self-report 24-h dietary recall method (Intake24): a doubly labelled water study and repeated-measures analysis. Journal of Nutritional Science. 2019 Sept 30;8:e29. Epub 2019 Aug 30. doi: 10.1017/jns.2019.20

Author

Bibtex

@article{25352cac02234fb599cea550e0435f2f,
title = "Validity and reliability of an online self-report 24-h dietary recall method (Intake24): a doubly labelled water study and repeated-measures analysis",
abstract = "Online self-reported 24-h dietary recall systems promise increased feasibility of dietary assessment. Comparison against interviewer-led recalls established their convergent validity; however, reliability and criterion-validity information is lacking. The validity of energy intakes (EI) reported using Intake24, an online 24-h recall system, was assessed against concurrent measurement of total energy expenditure (TEE) using doubly labelled water in ninety-eight UK adults (40–65 years). Accuracy and precision of EI were assessed using correlation and Bland–Altman analysis. Test–retest reliability of energy and nutrient intakes was assessed using data from three further UK studies where participants (11–88 years) completed Intake24 at least four times; reliability was assessed using intra-class correlations (ICC). Compared with TEE, participants under-reported EI by 25 % (95 % limits of agreement −73 % to +68 %) in the first recall, 22 % (−61 % to +41 %) for average of first two, and 25 % (−60 % to +28 %) for first three recalls. Correlations between EI and TEE were 0·31 (first), 0·47 (first two) and 0·39 (first three recalls), respectively. ICC for a single recall was 0·35 for EI and ranged from 0·31 for Fe to 0·43 for non-milk extrinsic sugars (NMES). Considering pairs of recalls (first two v. third and fourth recalls), ICC was 0·52 for EI and ranged from 0·37 for fat to 0·63 for NMES. EI reported with Intake24 was moderately correlated with objectively measured TEE and underestimated on average to the same extent as seen with interviewer-led 24-h recalls and estimated weight food diaries. Online 24-h recall systems may offer low-cost, low-burden alternatives for collecting dietary information.",
keywords = "Dietary assessment, Online 24-h dietary recall, Doubly labelled water, Validation, Repeatability, Reliability, UK adults",
author = "Emma Foster and Clement Lee and Fumiaki Imamura and Hollidge, {Stefanie E.} and Westgate, {Kate L.} and Venables, {Michelle C.} and Ivan Poliakov and Rowland, {Maisie K.} and Timur Osadchiy and Bradley, {Jennifer C.} and Simpson, {Emma L.} and Adamson, {Ashley J.} and Patrick Olivier and Nick Wareham and Forouhi, {Nita G.} and Soren Brage",
year = "2019",
month = sep,
day = "30",
doi = "10.1017/jns.2019.20",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
journal = "Journal of Nutritional Science",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Validity and reliability of an online self-report 24-h dietary recall method (Intake24)

T2 - a doubly labelled water study and repeated-measures analysis

AU - Foster, Emma

AU - Lee, Clement

AU - Imamura, Fumiaki

AU - Hollidge, Stefanie E.

AU - Westgate, Kate L.

AU - Venables, Michelle C.

AU - Poliakov, Ivan

AU - Rowland, Maisie K.

AU - Osadchiy, Timur

AU - Bradley, Jennifer C.

AU - Simpson, Emma L.

AU - Adamson, Ashley J.

AU - Olivier, Patrick

AU - Wareham, Nick

AU - Forouhi, Nita G.

AU - Brage, Soren

PY - 2019/9/30

Y1 - 2019/9/30

N2 - Online self-reported 24-h dietary recall systems promise increased feasibility of dietary assessment. Comparison against interviewer-led recalls established their convergent validity; however, reliability and criterion-validity information is lacking. The validity of energy intakes (EI) reported using Intake24, an online 24-h recall system, was assessed against concurrent measurement of total energy expenditure (TEE) using doubly labelled water in ninety-eight UK adults (40–65 years). Accuracy and precision of EI were assessed using correlation and Bland–Altman analysis. Test–retest reliability of energy and nutrient intakes was assessed using data from three further UK studies where participants (11–88 years) completed Intake24 at least four times; reliability was assessed using intra-class correlations (ICC). Compared with TEE, participants under-reported EI by 25 % (95 % limits of agreement −73 % to +68 %) in the first recall, 22 % (−61 % to +41 %) for average of first two, and 25 % (−60 % to +28 %) for first three recalls. Correlations between EI and TEE were 0·31 (first), 0·47 (first two) and 0·39 (first three recalls), respectively. ICC for a single recall was 0·35 for EI and ranged from 0·31 for Fe to 0·43 for non-milk extrinsic sugars (NMES). Considering pairs of recalls (first two v. third and fourth recalls), ICC was 0·52 for EI and ranged from 0·37 for fat to 0·63 for NMES. EI reported with Intake24 was moderately correlated with objectively measured TEE and underestimated on average to the same extent as seen with interviewer-led 24-h recalls and estimated weight food diaries. Online 24-h recall systems may offer low-cost, low-burden alternatives for collecting dietary information.

AB - Online self-reported 24-h dietary recall systems promise increased feasibility of dietary assessment. Comparison against interviewer-led recalls established their convergent validity; however, reliability and criterion-validity information is lacking. The validity of energy intakes (EI) reported using Intake24, an online 24-h recall system, was assessed against concurrent measurement of total energy expenditure (TEE) using doubly labelled water in ninety-eight UK adults (40–65 years). Accuracy and precision of EI were assessed using correlation and Bland–Altman analysis. Test–retest reliability of energy and nutrient intakes was assessed using data from three further UK studies where participants (11–88 years) completed Intake24 at least four times; reliability was assessed using intra-class correlations (ICC). Compared with TEE, participants under-reported EI by 25 % (95 % limits of agreement −73 % to +68 %) in the first recall, 22 % (−61 % to +41 %) for average of first two, and 25 % (−60 % to +28 %) for first three recalls. Correlations between EI and TEE were 0·31 (first), 0·47 (first two) and 0·39 (first three recalls), respectively. ICC for a single recall was 0·35 for EI and ranged from 0·31 for Fe to 0·43 for non-milk extrinsic sugars (NMES). Considering pairs of recalls (first two v. third and fourth recalls), ICC was 0·52 for EI and ranged from 0·37 for fat to 0·63 for NMES. EI reported with Intake24 was moderately correlated with objectively measured TEE and underestimated on average to the same extent as seen with interviewer-led 24-h recalls and estimated weight food diaries. Online 24-h recall systems may offer low-cost, low-burden alternatives for collecting dietary information.

KW - Dietary assessment

KW - Online 24-h dietary recall

KW - Doubly labelled water

KW - Validation

KW - Repeatability

KW - Reliability

KW - UK adults

U2 - 10.1017/jns.2019.20

DO - 10.1017/jns.2019.20

M3 - Journal article

VL - 8

JO - Journal of Nutritional Science

JF - Journal of Nutritional Science

M1 - e29

ER -