Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24355678›Full record

SynthesisAmerican journal of preventive medicine2014

Dietary assessment in food environment research: a systematic review.

Sharon I Kirkpatrick, Jill Reedy, Eboneé N Butler, Kevin W Dodd, Amy F Subar, Frances E Thompson, Robin A McKinnon

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in American journal of preventive medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 82 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
82citing papers in PubMed, 14 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

82 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Influences of the community and consumer nutrition environment on the food purchases and dietary behaviors of adolescents: A systematic review.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Measurement Methods Used to Assess the School Food Environment: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Neighbourhood retail food outlet access, diet and body mass index in Canada: a systematic review.Health promotion and chronic disease prevention in Canada : research, policy and practice · 2019
    Pooled it
  7. Measuring beverage consumption in US children and adolescents: a systematic review.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2018
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

22 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Sharon I KirkpatrickSchool of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada; Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland. Electronic address: sharon.kirkpatrick@uwaterloo.ca.
Jill ReedyDivision of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland.
Eboneé N ButlerDivision of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland; Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Kevin W DoddDivision of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland.
Amy F SubarDivision of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland.
Frances E ThompsonDivision of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland.
Robin A McKinnonDivision of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland.

Funding

Intramural NIH HHS Z99 CA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextThe existing evidence on food environments and diet is inconsistent, potentially because of heterogeneity in measures used to assess diet. The objective of this review, conducted in 2012-2013, was to examine measures of dietary intake utilized in food environment research. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Included studies were published from January 2007 through June 2012 and assessed relationships between at least one food environment exposure and at least one dietary outcome. Fifty-one articles were identified using PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Knowledge, and PsycINFO; references listed in the papers reviewed and relevant review articles; and the National Cancer Institute's Measures of the Food Environment website. The frequency of the use of dietary intake measures and assessment of specific dietary outcomes were examined, as were patterns of results among studies using different dietary measures. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The majority of studies used brief instruments, such as screeners or one or two questions, to assess intake. Food frequency questionnaires were used in about a quarter of studies, one in ten used 24-hour recalls, and fewer than one in 20 used diaries. Little consideration of dietary measurement error was evident. Associations between the food environment and diet were more consistently in the expected direction in studies using less error-prone measures.

conclusionsThere is a tendency toward the use of brief dietary assessment instruments with low cost and burden rather than more detailed instruments that capture intake with less bias. Use of error-prone dietary measures may lead to spurious findings and reduced power to detect associations.

Indexed as

Diet SurveysFoodDietEnvironmentHumans

Identifiers

PMID24355678
PMCPMC4558887

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.