Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29351220›Full record

ArticleNutrients2018

Assessment of Validity and Reproducibility of the Zinc-Specific Dietary Intake Questionnaire Conducted for Young Polish Female Respondents.

Dominika Głąbska, Aleksandra Staniec, Dominika Guzek

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrients, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

3 authors.

Dominika GłąbskaDepartment of Dietetics, Faculty of Human Nutrition and Consumer Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences (WULS-SGGW), 159c Nowoursynowska Str., 02-776 Warsaw, Poland. dominika_glabska@sggw.pl.ORCID 0000-0001-8588-7357
Aleksandra StaniecDepartment of Dietetics, Faculty of Human Nutrition and Consumer Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences (WULS-SGGW), 159c Nowoursynowska Str., 02-776 Warsaw, Poland. aleksandra_staniec@sggw.pl.
Dominika GuzekDepartment of Organization and Consumption Economics, Faculty of Human Nutrition and Consumer Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences (WULS-SGGW), 159c Nowoursynowska Str., 02-776 Warsaw, Poland. dominika_guzek@sggw.pl.ORCID 0000-0002-0784-3604

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One of the brief methods enabling the assessment of the zinc intake and identification of individuals characterized by insufficient zinc intake, is zinc-specific food frequency questionnaire. The aim of the study was to assess the validity and reproducibility of the elaborated zinc-specific food frequency questionnaire ZINC-FFQ (Zinc INtake Calculation-Food Frequency Questionnaire) in a group of young Polish female respondents. The validity was assessed in comparison with 3-day dietary records, while reproducibility was assessed for the ZINC-FFQ filled in twice (FFQ1 and FFQ2-six weeks apart). Bland-Altman indexes in the assessment of validity were 5.5% (FFQ1) and 6.7% (FFQ2), while in assessment of reproducibility it was 3.3%. In the assessment of reproducibility, 83% of respondents were classified into the same category of zinc intake adequacy and 72% of respondents were classified into the same tertile, that contributed to weighted

Indexed as

DietSurveys and QuestionnairesWhite PeopleDiet RecordsFemaleHumansNutritional StatusNutrition AssessmentPolandReproducibility of ResultsYoung AdultZincZincfood frequency questionnairereproducibilityvalidation studyvalidityzincZINC-FFQ

Identifiers

PMID29351220
PMCPMC5793332

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.