Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26235206›Full record

ArticlePublic health nutrition2016

Relative validity of a semi-quantitative, web-based FFQ used in the 'Snart Forældre' cohort - a Danish study of diet and fertility.

Vibeke K Knudsen, Elizabeth E Hatch, Heidi Cueto, Katherine L Tucker, Lauren Wise, Tue Christensen, Ellen M Mikkelsen

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Public health nutrition, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. The PRIDE Study: Evaluation of online methods of data collection.Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2020
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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.

Vibeke K Knudsen1Division of Nutrition,National Food Institute,Technical University of Denmark,Mørkhøj Bygade 19,2860 Søborg,Denmark.
Elizabeth E Hatch2Department of Epidemiology,Boston University School of Public Health,Boston,MA,USA.
Heidi Cueto3Department of Clinical Epidemiology,Aarhus University Hospital,Aarhus,Denmark.
Katherine L Tucker4Department of Clinical Laboratory & Nutritional Sciences,University of Massachusetts Lowell,Lowell,MA,USA.
Lauren Wise2Department of Epidemiology,Boston University School of Public Health,Boston,MA,USA.
Tue Christensen1Division of Nutrition,National Food Institute,Technical University of Denmark,Mørkhøj Bygade 19,2860 Søborg,Denmark.
Ellen M Mikkelsen3Department of Clinical Epidemiology,Aarhus University Hospital,Aarhus,Denmark.

Funding

An internet based prospective study of time to pregnancyR01HD060680 · NICHD · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI HATCH, ELIZABETH E · 2010 to 2014
$2.6M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD060680PHS HHS R01-060680
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the relative validity of a semi-quantitative, web-based FFQ completed by female pregnancy planners in the Danish 'Snart Forældre' study.

designWe validated a web-based FFQ based on the FFQ used in the Danish National Birth Cohort against a 4 d food diary (FD) and assessed the relative validity of intakes of foods and nutrients. We compared means and medians of intakes, and calculated Pearson correlation coefficients and de-attenuated coefficients to assess agreement between the two methods. We also calculated the proportion correctly classified based on the same or adjacent quintile of intake and the proportion of grossly misclassified (extreme quintiles).

settingParticipants (n 128) in the 'Snart Forældre' study who had completed the web-based FFQ were invited to participate in the validation study. SUBJECTS: Participants in the 'Snart Forældre' study, in total ninety-seven women aged 20-42 years.

resultsReported intakes of dairy products, vegetables and potatoes were higher in the FFQ compared with the FD, whereas reported intakes of fruit, meat, sugar and beverages were lower in the FFQ than in the FD. Overall the de-attenuated correlation coefficients were acceptable, ranging from 0·33 for energy to 0·93 for vitamin D. The majority of the women were classified in the same or adjacent quintile and few women were misclassified (extreme quintiles).

conclusionThe web-based FFQ performs well for ranking women of reproductive age according to high or low intake of foods and nutrients and, thus, provides a solid basis for investigating associations between diet and fertility.

Indexed as

DietFertilitySurveys and QuestionnairesAdultBeveragesDairy ProductsDenmarkDiet, HealthyDiet RecordsEnergy IntakeFemaleFollow-Up StudiesFruitHumansInternetLife StyleMicronutrientsNutritive SweetenersVitamin DFecundityPre-pregnancyRelative validityWeb-based FFQ

Identifiers

PMID26235206
PMCPMC7681628

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.