ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2026
Validation of a semi-quantitative Food Frequency Questionnaire for dietary assessment among adults in Northwest China.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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: Accurately assessing habitual diet is essential for nutritional epidemiology. While food frequency questionnaires (FFQs) are a practical tool for large-scale studies, they require population-specific validation due to regional dietary variations. This study aimed to validate a culturally tailored semi-quantitative FFQ for an understudied population in Northwest China, utilizing a digital Chronic Disease Follow-up Platform (CDFP) to enhance data collection and participant engagement. Methods: A culturally specific 62-item FFQ was developed based on local dietary surveys. The FFQ was administered twice (FFQ1, FFQ2) 3 months apart to assess reproducibility. Relative validity was evaluated against the average of three non-consecutive 24-h food records (3d-FR). The CDFP was employed to manage the entire validation study workflow, including recruiting, sending automated short-message reminders for uploading photographs of food records, and scheduling follow-up telephone calls for the completion of two FFQ administrations (FFQ1, FFQ2). Nutrient intakes were calculated using the China Food Composition Database. Statistical analyses included correlations, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), cross-classification into quartiles, weighted kappa statistics, and Bland-Altman plots. Results: The FFQ demonstrated good to excellent reproducibility, with a mean ICC of 0.71 between FFQ1 and FFQ2. Energy-adjusted correlation coefficients between the FFQ1 and FFQ2 ranged from 0.46 to 0.82 (mean: 0.70). For validity, cross-classification showed 77.1% of participants were assigned to the same or adjacent quartile on average, with gross misclassification into opposite quartiles averaging 5.2%. Bland-Altman analysis indicated acceptable agreement, though a systematic overestimation by the FFQ was observed for energy and most nutrients. However, we also observed modest to fair validity correlations (mean crude Conclusions: The developed FFQ shows reasonable reproducibility and acceptable relative validity for ranking nutrient intakes rather than for estimating absolute intakes among adults in northwest China. The integration of the CDFP proved to be an effective strategy for avoiding loss to follow-ups and ensuring high-quality dietary data collection. Further validation studies in community-based settings with larger and more balanced samples are required.
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.