Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28302344›Full record

ArticleJournal of epidemiology2017

Comparison of weighed food record procedures for the reference methods in two validation studies of food frequency questionnaires.

Yuri Ishii, Junko Ishihara, Ribeka Takachi, Yurie Shinozawa, Nahomi Imaeda, Chiho Goto, Kenji Wakai, Toshiaki Takahashi, Hiroyasu Iso, Kazutoshi Nakamura and 23 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of epidemiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

33 authors at 20 institutions in 2 countries.

Yuri IshiiFaculty of Nutritional Science, Sagami Women's University, Kanagawa, Japan; Epidemiology and Prevention Group, Research Center for Cancer Prevention and Screening, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan.
Junko IshiharaFaculty of Nutritional Science, Sagami Women's University, Kanagawa, Japan; Epidemiology and Prevention Group, Research Center for Cancer Prevention and Screening, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan. Electronic address: ishihara_junko@isc.sagami-wu.ac.jp.
Ribeka TakachiFaculty Division of Human Life and Environmental Sciences, Research Group of Food Science and Nutrition, Nara Women's University, Nara, Japan; Department of Community Preventive Medicine, Niigata University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Niigata, Japan.
Yurie ShinozawaEpidemiology and Prevention Group, Research Center for Cancer Prevention and Screening, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan.
Nahomi ImaedaDepartment of Food Science and Nutrition, Faculty of Human Life and Environmental Sciences, Nagoya Women's University, Aichi, Japan.
Chiho GotoDepartment of Health and Nutrition, School of Health and Human Life, Nagoya Bunri University, Aichi, Japan.
Kenji WakaiDepartment of Preventive Medicine, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Aichi, Japan.
Toshiaki TakahashiDepartment of Cardiology, Hiraka General Hospital, Akita, Japan.
Hiroyasu IsoPublic Health, Department of Social and Environmental Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan.
Kazutoshi NakamuraDepartment of Community Preventive Medicine, Niigata University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Niigata, Japan.
Junta TanakaDepartment of Health Promotion Medicine, Niigata University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Niigata, Japan.
Taichi ShimazuEpidemiology and Prevention Group, Research Center for Cancer Prevention and Screening, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan.
Taiki YamajiEpidemiology and Prevention Group, Research Center for Cancer Prevention and Screening, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan.
Shizuka SasazukiEpidemiology and Prevention Group, Research Center for Cancer Prevention and Screening, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan.
Norie SawadaEpidemiology and Prevention Group, Research Center for Cancer Prevention and Screening, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan.
Motoki IwasakiEpidemiology and Prevention Group, Research Center for Cancer Prevention and Screening, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan.
Haruo MikamiDivision of Cancer Registry, Prevention and Epidemiology, Chiba Cancer Center Research Institute, Chiba, Japan.
Kiyonori KurikiLaboratory of Public Health, School of Food and Nutritional Sciences, University of Shizuoka, Shizuoka, Japan.
Mariko NaitoDepartment of Preventive Medicine, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Aichi, Japan.
Naoko OkamotoDepartment of Public Health, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Aichi, Japan.
Fumi KondoDepartment of Public Health, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Aichi, Japan.
Satoyo HosonoDivision of Epidemiology and Prevention, Aichi Cancer Center Research Institute, Aichi, Japan.
Naoko MiyagawaDepartment of Public Health, Shiga University of Medical Science, Shiga, Japan.
Etsuko OzakiDepartment of Epidemiology for Community Health and Medicine, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan.
Sakurako Katsuura-KamanoDepartment of Preventive Medicine, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Tokushima University Graduate School, Tokushima, Japan.
Keizo OhnakaDepartment of Geriatric Medicine, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Hinako NanriDepartment of Public Health, Showa University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Noriko Tsunematsu-NakahataDepartment of Community Medicine Management, Faculty of Medicine, Shimane University, Shimane, Japan.
Takamasa KayamaDepartment of Advanced Cancer Science, Yamagata University Faculty of Medicine, Yamagata, Japan.
Ayako KuriharaDepartment of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, School of Medicine, Keio University, Tokyo, Japan.
Shiomi KojimaFaculty of Health Promotional Science, Tokoha University, Shizuoka, Japan.
Hideo TanakaDivision of Epidemiology and Prevention, Aichi Cancer Center Research Institute, Aichi, Japan; Department of Epidemiology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Aichi, Japan.
Shoichiro TsuganeEpidemiology and Prevention Group, Research Center for Cancer Prevention and Screening, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan.
Niigata University · JPAichi Cancer Center · JPNagoya City University · JPNagoya University · JPPrevention Group · USChiba Cancer Center · JPHiraka General Hospital · JPKeio University · JPKyoto Prefectural University of Medicine · JPKyushu University · JPNagoya Bunri University · JPNagoya Women's University · JPShiga University of Medical Science · JPShimane University · JPShowa University · JPThe University of Osaka · JPTokoha Gakuen University · JPTokushima University · JPUniversity of Shizuoka · JPYamagata University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough open-ended dietary assessment methods, such as weighed food records (WFRs), are generally considered to be comparable, differences between procedures may influence outcome when WFRs are conducted independently. In this paper, we assess the procedures of WFRs in two studies to describe their dietary assessment procedures and compare the subsequent outcomes.

methodsWFRs of 12 days (3 days for four seasons) were conducted as reference methods for intake data, in accordance with the study protocol, among a subsample of participants of two large cohort studies. We compared the WFR procedures descriptively. We also compared some dietary intake variables, such as the frequency of foods and dishes and contributing foods, to determine whether there were differences in the portion size distribution and intra- and inter-individual variation in nutrient intakes caused by the difference in procedures.

resultsGeneral procedures of the dietary records were conducted in accordance with the National Health and Nutrition Survey and were the same for both studies. Differences were seen in 1) selection of multiple days (non-consecutive days versus consecutive days); and 2) survey sheet recording method (individual versus family participation). However, the foods contributing to intake of energy and selected nutrients, the portion size distribution, and intra- and inter-individual variation in nutrient intakes were similar between the two studies.

conclusionOur comparison of WFR procedures in two independent studies revealed several differences. Notwithstanding these procedural differences, however, the subsequent outcomes were similar.

Indexed as

Diet RecordsValidation Studies as TopicAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCohort StudiesDiet SurveysEnergy IntakeFemaleHumansJapanMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsDietary assessment methodDietary recordsStandardization

Identifiers

PMID28302344
PMCPMC5498406
OpenAlexW2596151106

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.