Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28377391›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2017

Dietary assessment of British police force employees: a description of diet record coding procedures and cross-sectional evaluation of dietary energy intake reporting (The Airwave Health Monitoring Study).

Rachel Gibson, Rebeca Eriksen, Kathryn Lamb, Yvonne McMeel, Anne-Claire Vergnaud, Jeanette Spear, Maria Aresu, Queenie Chan, Paul Elliott, Gary Frost

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rachel GibsonNutrition and Dietetic Research Group, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College, London, UK.
Rebeca EriksenNutrition and Dietetic Research Group, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College, London, UK.
Kathryn LambNutrition and Dietetic Research Group, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College, London, UK.
Yvonne McMeelNutrition and Dietetic Research Group, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College, London, UK.
Anne-Claire VergnaudDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, MRC-PHE Centre for Environment and Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College, London, UK.
Jeanette SpearDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, MRC-PHE Centre for Environment and Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College, London, UK.
Maria AresuDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, MRC-PHE Centre for Environment and Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College, London, UK.
Queenie ChanDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, MRC-PHE Centre for Environment and Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College, London, UK.
Paul ElliottDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, MRC-PHE Centre for Environment and Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College, London, UK.
Gary FrostNutrition and Dietetic Research Group, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College, London, UK.
Imperial College London · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilMedical Research Council MR/L01341X/1Medical Research Council MR/L01632X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesDietary intake is a key aspect of occupational health. To capture the characteristics of dietary behaviour that is affected by occupational environment that may affect disease risk, a collection of prospective multiday dietary records is required. The aims of this paper are to: (1) collect multiday dietary data in the Airwave Health Monitoring Study, (2) describe the dietary coding procedures applied and (3) investigate the plausibility of dietary reporting in this occupational cohort.

designA dietary coding protocol for this large-scale study was developed to minimise coding error rate. Participants (n 4412) who completed 7-day food records were included for cross-sectional analyses. Energy intake (EI) misreporting was estimated using the Goldberg method. Multivariate logistic regression models were applied to determine participant characteristics associated with EI misreporting.

settingBritish police force employees enrolled (2007-2012) into the Airwave Health Monitoring Study.

resultsThe mean code error rate per food diary was 3.7% (SD 3.2%). The strongest predictors of EI under-reporting were body mass index (BMI) and physical activity. Compared with participants with BMI<25 kg/m

conclusionsA reproducible dietary record coding procedure has been developed to minimise coding error in complex 7-day diet diaries. The prevalence of EI under-reporting is comparable with existing national UK cohorts and, in agreement with previous studies, classification of under-reporting was biased towards specific subgroups of participants.

Indexed as

Diet RecordsEnergy IntakeNutrition AssessmentPoliceSelf ReportAdultBody Mass IndexCross-Sectional StudiesExerciseFemaleHumansIncidenceMaleObesityProspective StudiesUnited KingdomEPIDEMIOLOGYNUTRITION & DIETETICSOCCUPATIONAL & INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE

Identifiers

PMID28377391
PMCPMC5388011
OpenAlexW2582340278

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.