No abstract

Objective: Assessing the value of a newly developed electronic visual analogue scale questionnaire (Apple Newton Message Pad) with the traditional paper method for appetite rating. Design: In a random, crossover design, subjects completed both electronic and paper questionnaires to compare results obtained by the two methods; individual methods were completed consecutively to assess test-retest reliability; preference was established using a questionnaire. Setting/Subjects: Healthy, free-living adults were studied for comparison of methods (n 12), test-retest reliability (n 8) and preference (n 13). Intervention: Visual analogue scales were completed each waking hour to assess appetite. Preference was assessed after both methods were completed. Results: There was no signi®cant difference in the hourly results obtained by the paper and electronic methods for`desire to eat',`how much can you eat now',`urge to eat' and`preoccupation with thoughts of food'. Small differences in`hunger' and`fullness' ratings were noted ( $ 5% mean difference between methods, P`0.05), but patterns of change and sensitivity for these and all other parameters remained similar for both methods across the visual analogue scale. Test-retest reliability demonstrated was similar for both methods. Seven (54%) subjects preferred to use the paper questionnaire, ®ve (38%) the electronic method and one (8%) had no preference. Conclusions: The electronic Apple Newton questionnaire is as sensitive and reliable as the paper method, has the advantage that it automatically records the time of data acquisition and data collection and processing are more ef®cient for the researcher. The two methods should not be used interchangeably.

It is a commonly held belief that exercise (one method of inducing an energy deficit) causes a compensation in energy intake to match the exercise-induced energy expenditure. This could possibly lead to the belief that exercise is not a useful method of weight loss which could then be used as an excuse not to exercise. However, there is no compelling evidence to suggest that exercise drives hunger and energy intake to cause a compensation in food intake. Indeed, the evidence suggests interventions in energy expenditure are not compensated for by changes in energy intake at least in the short-term (see King et al. 19976 for a review). This suggests only weak short-term coupling between energy expenditure and energy intake. However, since the negative energy balance could not continue indefinitely an equilibrium of energy intake and energy expenditure must occur at some stage. The exact time course (and mechanism) of such a compensatory change in energy intake is not yet known.

No abstract