ArticleCirculation reports2025
Reproducibility and Validity of a Food Intake Survey Developed for Implementation via Digital Health for Patients With or at Risk for Cardiovascular Disease.
Article in Circulation reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- App-based lifestyle modification after percutaneous coronary intervention: A multicenter randomized controlled trial.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: We developed the SaFIS, a structured self-administered food intake survey for patients with cardiovascular diseases needing dietary improvements. Methods and Results: The SaFIS comprised questions on 31 items, including staple foods (7 items) and food ingredients (24 items), based on the foods recommended by the Japanese Atherosclerosis Society for the Prevention of Arteriosclerotic Disease. To evaluate reproducibility, SaFIS was administered twice with a 1-month interval using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC [1,1]). Validity was assessed by comparing energy and nutrient content from a weighed dietary record (WDR) with the first SaFIS survey using Bland-Altman plots. Reproducibility values were energy (ICC 0.90, 95% confidence interval: 0.80-0.95), protein (0.90, 0.80-0.95), fat (0.76, 0.54-0.88), saturated fatty acids (0.78, 0.58-0.89), monounsaturated fatty acids (0.76, 0.56-0.88), polyunsaturated fatty acids (0.82, 0.66-0.91), carbohydrates (0.89, 0.79-0.95), and dietary fiber (0.86, 0.71-0.93). Bland-Altman values indicated SaFIS-based energy, protein, carbohydrate, monounsaturated fatty acids, and dietary fiber were 67.2 kJ, 5.7 g, 3.9 g, 0.5 g, and 1.8 g greater than WDR-based values, respectively. SaFIS-based fat, saturated, and polyunsaturated fatty acid values were 0.7 g, 1.3 g, and 0.39 g less than WDR-based values, respectively. Conclusions: SaFIS demonstrated high reproducibility and validity with clinical potential. Subsequent introduction to digital health from the usability perspective is planned.
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.