Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26486299›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2016

Validating self-reported food expenditures against food store and eating-out receipts.

W Tang, A Aggarwal, Z Liu, M Acheson, C D Rehm, A V Moudon, A Drewnowski

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. To what extent do food purchases reflect shoppers' diet quality and nutrient intake?The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2017
    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.

W TangCenter for Public Health Nutrition, University of Washington, Seattle WA, USA.
A AggarwalCenter for Public Health Nutrition, University of Washington, Seattle WA, USA.
Z LiuCenter for Public Health Nutrition, University of Washington, Seattle WA, USA.
M AchesonCenter for Public Health Nutrition, University of Washington, Seattle WA, USA.
C D RehmCenter for Public Health Nutrition, University of Washington, Seattle WA, USA.
A V MoudonUrban Form Lab, University of Washington, Seattle WA, USA.
A DrewnowskiCenter for Public Health Nutrition, University of Washington, Seattle WA, USA.

Funding

Food Environment, Diet Quality and Disparities in ObesityR01DK076608 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI DREWNOWSKI, ADAM · 2008 to 2019
$6.3M
An Exploratory Center for Obesity Research (RMI)P20RR020774 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI DREWNOWSKI, ADAM · 2004 to 2006
$1.7M
NCRR NIH HHS P20 RR020774NCRR NIH HHS P20 RR020774-03NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK076608NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK076608-04NIDDK NIH HHS R21 DK020774
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

objectivesTo compare objective food store and eating-out receipts with self-reported household food expenditures. SUBJECTS/

methodsThe Seattle Obesity Study II was based on a representative sample of King County adults, Washington, USA. Self-reported household food expenditures were modeled on the Flexible Consumer Behavior Survey (FCBS) Module from 2007 to 2009 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Objective food expenditure data were collected using receipts. Self-reported food expenditures for 447 participants were compared with receipts using paired t-tests, Bland-Altman plots and κ-statistics. Bias by sociodemographics was also examined.

resultsSelf-reported expenditures closely matched with objective receipt data. Paired t-tests showed no significant differences between receipts and self-reported data on total food expenditures, expenditures at food stores or eating out. However, the highest-income strata showed weaker agreement. Bland-Altman plots confirmed no significant bias across both methods-mean difference: 6.4; agreement limits: -123.5 to 143.4 for total food expenditures, mean difference 5.7 for food stores and mean difference 1.7 for eating out. The κ-statistics showed good agreement for each (κ 0.51, 0.41 and 0.49 respectively. Households with higher education and income had significantly more number of receipts and higher food expenditures.

conclusionsSelf-reported food expenditures using NHANES questions, both for food stores and eating out, serve as a decent proxy for objective household food expenditures from receipts. This method should be used with caution among high-income populations, or with high food expenditures. This is the first validation of the FCBS food expenditures question using food store and eating-out receipts.

Indexed as

Consumer BehaviorCosts and Cost AnalysisSelf ReportAdultFamily CharacteristicsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesFoodHumansMaleMiddle AgedNutrition SurveysProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsSocioeconomic FactorsWashington

Identifiers

PMID26486299
PMCPMC4775333

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.