ArticleCurrent developments in nutrition2026
Validity of the Diet Quality Questionnaire Compared with Observed Intake for Estimating Population-Level Diet Quality in Rwandan Adults.
Article in Current developments in nutrition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Novel Automated Participant-Recorded Dietary Data Collection Method Using Low-Cost Mobile Phones and Interactive Voice Response with Low-Literacy Women: A Validation Study in Rural Uganda.Current developments in nutrition · 2026Article
- 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The diet quality questionnaire (DQQ) is a standardized low-burden tool for collecting data on minimum dietary diversity for women (MDD-W) and other population-level diet quality indicators related to risk of noncommunicable disease (NCD). Although 24-h recalls (24hRs) are often used for evaluating validity of DQQ, they may underestimate consumption of specific food groups. Therefore, comparison with observed weighed food records (OWFR), can provide a more accurate assessment of DQQ criterion validity. Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate criterion validity of DQQ for estimating population-level diet quality using OWFR and 24hR as reference methods. Methods: Cross-sectional data were collected among 281 Rwandan adults (Musanze district), using OWFR, DQQ, and 24hR on the same day. Diet quality indicators derived from each method were compared using parametric and nonparametric methods and the method of triads, which calculates pairwise validity coefficients to evaluate accuracy (low: <0.30; moderate: 0.30-0.70; high >0.70). Results: Mean percent agreement in food group consumption data was high: 93% (DQQ-OWFR; DQQ-24hR). Compared with OWFR, DQQ overestimated MDD-W-prevalence [DQQ: 46.0% compared with OWFR: 40.4%; +6 percentage points (pp), Conclusions: The DQQ showed high agreement with OWFR and 24hR for collecting population-level food group consumption data, and slight overestimations of diet quality indicator scores compared with observed intakes. DQQ is a valid and practical method for collecting population-level food group consumption data and estimating diet quality.
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.