ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2025
Agreement between the National Cancer Institute's Diet History Questionnaire II and III in a preconception cohort.
Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Associations Between Habitual Dietary Fat Intake and Inflammatory Markers Among Marathon Runners: An Exploratory Study.Nutrients · 2026Article
- A SERS/bFQICA/Colorimetric triple-mode LFIA method for rapid quantitative detection of meropenem.Mikrochimica acta · 2025Article
- Life Course Financial Hardship and Fecundability in a North American Preconception Cohort Study.Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Food frequency questionnaires require updating over time due to population changes in diet, posing analytical challenges in consistently measuring diet in prospective studies. We compared reliability and agreement between nutrients in versions of the National Cancer Institute's web-based Diet History Questionnaire (DHQ, III vs II) in an ongoing North American preconception study. We invited 51 consecutively enrolled US female participants aged 21-45 years to complete both DHQ versions within a 2-week period in a randomized order. We compared 30 nutrients from both DHQ versions and calculated within-person reliability using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Bland-Altman plots and 95% limits of agreement (LOA) were generated to assess nutrient agreement between DHQ versions. We observed highest reliability in percent energy from carbohydrates and cholesterol (ICCs, 0.88; 95% IC, 0.80-0.93) and lowest for percent energy from protein and vitamin D (ICCs, 0.56; 95% IC, 0.34-0.72). At the group level, all nutrients had most observations within the LOA. Bland-Altman plots showed assessment differences between DHQs for protein, fat, monounsaturated fat, and vitamin D. The remaining nutrients showed good agreement and good to moderate reliability. Some nutrients may require adjustment and calibration analysis before using them interchangeably across DHQ versions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.