ArticlePloS one2015
Relative Validity of Three Food Frequency Questionnaires for Assessing Dietary Intakes of Guatemalan Schoolchildren.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dietary assessment tools for children and adolescents in Latin America: a scoping review.Journal of nutritional science · 2026Article
- Global Trends in the Availability of Dietary Data in Low and Middle-Income Countries.Nutrients · 2022Article
- Food Away From Home and Self-Perceived Gastrointestinal Health.Frontiers in nutrition · 2021Article
- Evaluation of a Quantitative Food Frequency Questionnaire for 5-Year-Old Children in an Asian Population.Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics · 2020Article
- Article
- Design and validation of a food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) for the nutritional evaluation of food intake in the Peruvian Amazon.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the relative validity of three food frequency questionnaires (FFQs) compared with results from 24-hour dietary recalls for measuring dietary intakes in Guatemalan schoolchildren.
designA cross-sectional study of primary caregivers (mothers or grandmothers) of 6-11 year-old children. Caregivers completed one of three constructed FFQs to measure the child's dietary consumption in the last week: FFQ1 did not incorporate portion sizes; FFQ2 provided portion sizes; and FFQ3 incorporated pictures of median portion sizes. During the same week, each caregiver also completed three 24-hour dietary recalls. Results from the FFQ were compared with corresponding results from the 24-hour dietary recalls.
settingSanta Catarina Pinula, peri-urban Guatemala City. SUBJECTS: Caregivers (n = 145) of 6-11 year-old children: 46 completed FFQ1, 49 completed FFQ2, and 50 completed FFQ3.
resultsThe mean values for all nutrients obtained from the 24-hour dietary recall were lower than for those obtained from the FFQs, excluding folic acid in FFQ3, cholesterol and zinc in FFQ2, and cholesterol, folic acid, magnesium, potassium, sodium, and zinc in FFQ1. Energy-adjusted Pearson correlation coefficients ranged from 0.07 (protein) to 0.54 (cholesterol) for FFQ1 and from 0.05 to 0.74 for FFQ2 and FFQ3. Agreement by both methods (FFQ and 24-hour dietary recalls) of classifying children into the same or adjacent quartiles of energy-adjusted nutrient consumption ranged from 62.0% for cholesterol to 95.9% for vitamin B12 across all three FFQs.
conclusionsOur FFQs had moderate to good relative validity in measuring energy and nutrient intakes for 6-11 year-old Guatemalan children. More evidence is needed to evaluate their reproducibility and applicability in similar populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.