Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35445059›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2022

Comparison of Flavonoid Intake Assessment Methods Using USDA and Phenol Explorer Databases: Subcohort Diet, Cancer and Health-Next Generations-MAX Study.

Fabian Lanuza, Nicola P Bondonno, Raul Zamora-Ros, Agnetha Linn Rostgaard-Hansen, Anne Tjønneland, Rikard Landberg, Jytte Halkjær, Cristina Andres-Lacueva

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2022. 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
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  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

8 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Fabian LanuzaBiomarkers and Nutrimetabolomics Laboratory, Department of Nutrition, Food Sciences and Gastronomy, Food Innovation Network (XIA), Faculty of Pharmacy and Food Sciences, Institute of Nutrition and Food Safety (INSA-UB), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Nicola P BondonnoDanish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Raul Zamora-RosBiomarkers and Nutrimetabolomics Laboratory, Department of Nutrition, Food Sciences and Gastronomy, Food Innovation Network (XIA), Faculty of Pharmacy and Food Sciences, Institute of Nutrition and Food Safety (INSA-UB), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Agnetha Linn Rostgaard-HansenDanish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Anne TjønnelandDanish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Rikard LandbergDivision of Food and Nutrition Science, Department of Biology and Biological Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Jytte HalkjærDanish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Cristina Andres-LacuevaBiomarkers and Nutrimetabolomics Laboratory, Department of Nutrition, Food Sciences and Gastronomy, Food Innovation Network (XIA), Faculty of Pharmacy and Food Sciences, Institute of Nutrition and Food Safety (INSA-UB), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Danish Cancer Society · DKUniversitat de Barcelona · ESChalmers University of Technology · SEEdith Cowan University · AUInstituto de Salud Carlos III · ESUniversity of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Flavonoids are bioactive plant compounds that are widely present in the human diet. Estimating flavonoid intake with a high degree of certainty is challenging due to the inherent limitations of dietary questionnaires and food composition databases. This study aimed to evaluate the degree of reliability among flavonoid intakes estimated using four different approaches based on the two most comprehensive flavonoid databases, namely, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Phenol Explorer (PE). In 678 individuals from the MAX study, a subcohort of the Diet, Cancer and Health-Next Generations cohort, dietary data were collected using three 24-h diet recalls over 1 year. Estimates of flavonoid intake were compared using flavonoid food content from PE as (1) aglycones (chromatography with hydrolysis), (2) aglycones transformed (converted from glycosides by chromatography without hydrolysis), (3) as they are in nature (glycosides, aglycones, and esters), and 4) using flavonoid content from USDA as aglycones (converted). Spearman's intra-class correlation (ICC) coefficient and weighted kappa (K) coefficient were calculated for the reliability analysis. When comparing PE total aglycones to USDA total aglycones, there was a moderate reliability when a continuous variable was used [ICC: 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.70-0.76] and an excellent reliability when flavonoid intake was modeled as a categorical variable (K: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.88-0.90). The degree of reliability among all methods of estimated flavonoid intakes was very similar, especially between database pairs, for the flavanol subclass, while larger differences were observed for flavone, flavonol, and isoflavone subclasses. Our findings indicate that caution should be taken when comparing the results of the associations between flavonoid intakes and health outcomes from studies, when flavonoid intakes were estimated using different methods, particularly for some subclasses.

Indexed as

aglyconeconcordancefood compositionglycosidepolyphenolreliability

Identifiers

PMID35445059
PMCPMC9014246
OpenAlexW4226058233

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.