Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35276804›Full record

ArticleNutrients2022

Validation of the MSM and NCI Method for Estimating the Usual Intake of Nutrients and Food According to Four Seasons of Seven Consecutive Daily 24 Hour Dietary Recalls in Chinese Adults.

Kun Huang, Dongmei Yu, Qiya Guo, Yuxiang Yang, Xiaoqi Wei, Liyun Zhao, Hongyun Fang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrients, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kun HuangKey Laboratory of Trace Element Nutrition of National Health Commission, National Institute for Nutrition and Health, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing 100050, China.ORCID 0000-0001-5340-1535
Dongmei YuKey Laboratory of Trace Element Nutrition of National Health Commission, National Institute for Nutrition and Health, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing 100050, China.
Qiya GuoKey Laboratory of Trace Element Nutrition of National Health Commission, National Institute for Nutrition and Health, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing 100050, China.
Yuxiang YangKey Laboratory of Trace Element Nutrition of National Health Commission, National Institute for Nutrition and Health, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing 100050, China.
Xiaoqi WeiKey Laboratory of Trace Element Nutrition of National Health Commission, National Institute for Nutrition and Health, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing 100050, China.ORCID 0000-0001-6454-8903
Liyun ZhaoKey Laboratory of Trace Element Nutrition of National Health Commission, National Institute for Nutrition and Health, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing 100050, China.
Hongyun FangKey Laboratory of Trace Element Nutrition of National Health Commission, National Institute for Nutrition and Health, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing 100050, China.
National Health and Family Planning Commission · CN

Funding

National Key Research and Development Project 2018YFC1603103
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Multiple Source Method (MSM) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI) method are used to estimate usual dietary intake from short-term dietary assessment instruments, such as 24 hour dietary recall (24-HRs). However, their performance has not been validated in the Chinese population via nutrition surveys. To validate the accuracy of the MSM and NCI method in estimating usual dietary intake in the Chinese population, 752 individuals from northern and southern China answered four seasons of seven consecutive 24-HRs (one for each season). The true usual dietary intake was considered as the average of the 28 collection days of dietary component intake. Using data sets with consecutive 3 collection days, the usual intakes of the selected dietary components were estimated by MSM, NCI and the within-person mean of three 24-HRs (3 day method). These estimates were compared with the true usual intake at the group and individual level. At the group level, the MSM and NCI method performed similarly, yielding estimates closer to the true usual intake than 3 day method. The percentage differences of the estimates for dietary components not consumed daily from the MSM and NCI method were larger than for the dietary components consumed daily. However, the larger percentage differences were observed in the tail of the usual intake distribution. In general, dietary components with larger variance ratios had greater percentage differences. At the individual level, for overall seasons and dietary components, the biases of individual usual intake did agree for MSM and NCI method, whereas NCI method estimates were closer to true intakes than for the MSM and 3 day method. Similar results were observed in the relative biases of dietary components consumed daily. As with the group level, there was less percentage difference in dietary components consumed daily. Both the MSM and NCI method can be used to estimate usual intake in Chinese populations and are closer to the true usual intake than the traditional mean method, at both group and individual levels.

Indexed as

DietFoodAdultHumansNational Cancer Institute (U.S.)NutrientsSeasonsUnited StatesNutrientscomparisondietary componentsMSMNCIpercentage differenceusual intakevalidation

Identifiers

PMID35276804
PMCPMC8838361
OpenAlexW4206411707

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.