Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34836011›Full record

ArticleNutrients2021

Relative Validity of a Short 15-Item Food Frequency Questionnaire Measuring Dietary Quality, by the Diet History Method.

Elisabet Rothenberg, Elisabeth Strandhagen, Jessica Samuelsson, Felicia Ahlner, Therese Rydberg Sterner, Ingmar Skoog, Christina E Lundberg

Registry-linked trialAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrients, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07004231 (Using Gout Buddy to Enhance Dietary Literacy and Gout Management-A Mixed Method Clinical Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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.

NCT07004231 naactive not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Using Gout Buddy to Enhance Dietary Literacy and Gout Management-A Mixed Method Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorSingHealth PolyclinicsRan2025 to 2026Enrolled110ConditionsGoutArmsGOUT Buddy, an AI chatbot
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
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.

Elisabet RothenbergFaculty of Health Sciences, Kristianstad University, SE 291 88 Kristianstad, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-3692-7014
Elisabeth StrandhagenSchool of Public Health and Community Medicine, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, SE 413 90 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Jessica SamuelssonCentre for Ageing and Health (AgeCap), Department of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, SE 431 41 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Felicia AhlnerCentre for Ageing and Health (AgeCap), Department of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, SE 431 41 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Therese Rydberg SternerCentre for Ageing and Health (AgeCap), Department of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, SE 431 41 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Ingmar SkoogCentre for Ageing and Health (AgeCap), Department of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, SE 431 41 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Christina E LundbergDepartment of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, Institution of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, SE 416 50 Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-9062-9982

Funding

Svenska Forskningsrådet Formas 2013-1202, 2018-00471, 2013-2300, 2013-2496Vetenskapsrådet 2012-5041, 2015-02830, 2019-01096, 2013-8717, 2017-00639
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Food frequency questionnaires (FFQ) are commonly used dietary assessment tools. The aim was to assess the relative validity of a 15-item FFQ, designed for the screening of poor dietary patterns with a validated diet history (DH). The study population was derived from the Gothenburg H70 Birth Cohort Studies. The DH registrations were harmonized in accordance with the FFQ frequencies. The agreement was assessed by Cohen's kappa with corresponding confidence intervals (CI) for the frequency and categorical variables. Bland-Altman plots were used for the numeric variables. The study comprised data from 848 individuals (55.2% women). Overall, there was high agreement between the methods, with the exact and adjacent level of agreement over 80% for eight variables. The proportion attributed to the opposite frequency was fairly low for most of the frequency variables. Most of the kappa values were in fair or moderate agreement. The highest kappa values were calculated for the type of cooking fat (k = 0.68, CI = 0.63-0.72) and sandwich spread (k = 0.55, CI = 0.49-0.53), and the lowest for type of bread (0.13, CI = 0.07-0.20) and sweets (0.22 CI = 0.18-0.27). In conclusion, the FFQ showed overall good agreement compared with the DH. We, therefore, think it, with some improvements, could serve as a simple screening tool for poor dietary patterns.

Indexed as

Diet RecordsAgedBirth CohortDietDiet SurveysFemaleHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnairescardiovascular risk factorsdietary patterndiet historyfood frequency questionnairerelative validityscreening tool

Identifiers

PMID34836011
PMCPMC8622557

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.