Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40454162›Full record

ArticleCurrent developments in nutrition2025

You Say Potato, I Say Vegetable; You Say Tomato, I Say Fruit: Cognitive Validity of Food Group-Based Dietary Recall Questions.

Anna W Herforth, Isabela F Sattamini, Deborah A Olarte, Pablo Diego-Rosell, Andrew Rzepa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current developments in nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

5 authors.

Anna W HerforthDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, United States.
Isabela F SattaminiDepartment of Nutrition, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Deborah A OlarteProgram in Nutrition, Department of Health Studies & Applied Educational Psychology, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States.
Pablo Diego-RosellGallup, Washington, DC, United States.
Andrew RzepaGallup, Inc., Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: There is a need for valid, standardized approach for list-based questionnaires to measure food group consumption for indicators of diet quality including dietary diversity. Objectives: A common method for collecting dietary diversity data consists of open-ended food group questions, e.g. "Yesterday, did you eat any vegetables, such as cucumber, cabbage, or celery?" We sought to examine the cognitive validity of open-ended questions that require respondents to categorize foods and closed-ended alternatives using sentinel foods. Methods: Pretesting and 83 cognitive interviews were conducted in 5 languages in São Paulo and New York City in 2018. In structured interviews, respondents were asked to describe their thought processes in answering each question. Their feedback and responses to closed-ended and open-ended food group questions were compared. The Gallup World Poll then piloted 2 versions of the questionnaire in a nationally representative sample of 1000 in Brazil in 2018. Results: Respondents in all settings miscategorized foods when asked open-ended food group questions (0%-82%, depending on the food group), respondents varied in their ability to think of other foods that belonged to specified food groups (35%-50% could think of any items), and open-ended questions presented an additional cognitive burden. There were no significant differences between the results from closed-ended and open-ended questions in the national pilot test. In the context of a multitopic survey, the finalized questionnaire took 3-5 min to answer, had no additional training requirements, and enumerators reported similar ease in administration as modules on other topics. Conclusions: For data collection on food group consumption, open-ended questions requiring respondents to categorize foods present cognitive validity problems. Closed-ended questions using sentinel foods reduce or eliminate ambiguity, presenting lower cognitive burden and greater comprehension. Based on these results, the closed-ended method has been adopted in international survey platforms for measuring dietary diversity and other aspects of diet quality.

Indexed as

24-h recalldietary assessmentdietary diversitydiet quality questionnaireDQQMDD-Wminimum dietary diversity

Identifiers

PMID40454162
PMCPMC12125696

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.