The number of studies comparing nutritional quality of restrictive diets is limited. Data on vegan subjects are especially lacking. It was the aim of the present study to compare the quality and the contributing components of vegan, vegetarian, semi-vegetarian, pesco-vegetarian and omnivorous diets. Dietary intake was estimated using a cross-sectional online survey with a 52-items food frequency questionnaire (FFQ). Healthy Eating Index 2010 (HEI-2010) and the Mediterranean Diet Score (MDS) were calculated as indicators for diet quality. After analysis of the diet questionnaire and the FFQ, 1475 participants were classified as vegans (n = 104), vegetarians (n = 573), semi-vegetarians (n = 498), pesco-vegetarians (n = 145), and omnivores (n = 155). The most restricted diet, i.e., the vegan diet, had the lowest total energy intake, better fat intake profile, lowest protein and highest dietary fiber intake in contrast to the omnivorous diet. Calcium intake was lowest for the vegans and below national dietary recommendations. The vegan diet received the highest index values and the omnivorous the lowest for HEI-2010 and MDS. Typical aspects of a vegan diet (high fruit and vegetable intake, low sodium intake, and low intake of saturated fat) contributed substantially to the total score, independent of the indexing system used. The score for the more prudent diets (vegetarians, semi-vegetarians and pesco-vegetarians) differed as a function of the used indexing system but they were mostly better in terms of nutrient quality than the omnivores.

BackgroundConcerns have been raised about the quality of reporting in nutritional epidemiology. Research reporting guidelines such as the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement can improve quality of reporting in observational studies. Herein, we propose recommendations for reporting nutritional epidemiology and dietary assessment research by extending the STROBE statement into Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology—Nutritional Epidemiology (STROBE-nut).Methods and FindingsRecommendations for the reporting of nutritional epidemiology and dietary assessment research were developed following a systematic and consultative process, coordinated by a multidisciplinary group of 21 experts. Consensus on reporting guidelines was reached through a three-round Delphi consultation process with 53 external experts. In total, 24 recommendations for nutritional epidemiology were added to the STROBE checklist.ConclusionWhen used appropriately, reporting guidelines for nutritional epidemiology can contribute to improve reporting of observational studies with a focus on diet and health.

Concerns have been raised about the quality of reporting in nutritional epidemiology. Research reporting guidelines such as the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement can improve quality of reporting in observational studies. Herein, we propose recommendations for reporting nutritional epidemiology and dietary assessment research by extending the STROBE statement into Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology – Nutritional Epidemiology (STROBE‐nut). Recommendations for the reporting of nutritional epidemiology and dietary assessment research were developed following a systematic and consultative process, co‐ordinated by a multidisciplinary group of 21 experts. Consensus on reporting guidelines was reached through a three‐round Delphi consultation process with 53 external experts. In total, 24 recommendations for nutritional epidemiology were added to the STROBE checklist. When used appropriately, reporting guidelines for nutritional epidemiology can contribute to improve reporting of observational studies with a focus on diet and health.

No abstract

Food-based dietary guidelines (FBDG) aim to address the nutritional requirements at population level in order to prevent diseases and promote a healthy lifestyle. Diet quality indices can be used to assess the compliance with these FBDG. The present study aimed to investigate whether the newly developed Diet Quality Index for Adolescents (DQI-A) is a good surrogate measure for adherence to FBDG, and whether adherence to these FBDG effectively leads to better nutrient intakes and nutritional biomarkers in adolescents. Participants included 1804 European adolescents who were recruited in the Healthy Lifestyle in Europe by Nutrition in Adolescence (HELENA) Study. Dietary intake was assessed by two, non-consecutive 24 h recalls. A DQI-A score, considering the components' dietary quality, diversity and equilibrium, was calculated. Associations between the DQI-A and food and nutrient intakes and blood concentration biomarkers were investigated using multilevel regression analysis corrected for centre, age and sex. DQI-A scores were associated with food intake in the expected direction: positive associations with nutrient-dense food items, such as fruits and vegetables, and inverse associations with energy-dense and low-nutritious foods. On the nutrient level, the DQI-A was positively related to the intake of water, fibre and most minerals and vitamins. No association was found between the DQI-A and total fat intake. Furthermore, a positive association was observed with 25-hydroxyvitamin D, holo-transcobalamin and n-3 fatty acid serum levels. The present study has shown good validity of the DQI-A by confirming the expected associations with food and nutrient intakes and some biomarkers in blood

The use of two non-consecutive 24 h recalls using EPIC-Soft for standardised dietary monitoring in European countries has previously been proposed in the European Food Consumption Survey Method consortium. Whether this methodology is sufficiently valid to assess nutrient intake in a comparable way, among populations with different food patterns in Europe, is the subject of study in the European Food Consumption Validation consortium. The objective of the study was to compare the validity of usual protein and K intake estimated from two non-consecutive standardised 24 h recalls using EPIC-Soft between five selected centres in Europe. A total of 600 adults, aged 45-65 years, were recruited in Belgium, the Czech Republic, France, The Netherlands and Norway. From each participant, two 24 h recalls and two 24 h urines were collected. The mean and distribution of usual protein and K intake, as well as the ranking of intake, were compared with protein and K excretions within and between centres. Underestimation of protein (range 2 -13 %) and K (range 4 -17 %) intake was seen in all centres, except in the Czech Republic. We found a fair agreement between prevalences estimated based on the intake and excretion data at the lower end of the usual intake distribution (,10 % difference), but larger differences at other points. Protein and K intake was moderately correlated with excretion within the centres (ranges ¼ 0·39-0·67 and 0·37 -0·69, respectively). These were comparable across centres. In conclusion, two standardised 24 h recalls (EPIC-Soft) appear to be sufficiently valid for assessing and comparing the mean and distribution of protein and K intake across five centres in Europe as well as for ranking individuals.

BackgroundParental reports are often used in large-scale surveys to assess children's body mass index (BMI). Therefore, it is important to know to what extent these parental reports are valid and whether it makes a difference if the parents measured their children's weight and height at home or whether they simply estimated these values. The aim of this study is to compare the validity of parent-reported height, weight and BMI values of preschool children (3-7 y-old), when measured at home or estimated by parents without actual measurement.MethodsThe subjects were 297 Belgian preschool children (52.9% male). Participation rate was 73%. A questionnaire including questions about height and weight of the children was completed by the parents. Nurses measured height and weight following standardised procedures. International age- and sex-specific BMI cut-off values were employed to determine categories of weight status and obesity.ResultsOn the group level, no important differences in accuracy of reported height, weight and BMI were identified between parent-measured or estimated values. However, for all 3 parameters, the correlations between parental reports and nurse measurements were higher in the group of children whose body dimensions were measured by the parents. Sensitivity for underweight and overweight/obesity were respectively 73% and 47% when parents measured their child's height and weight, and 55% and 47% when parents estimated values without measurement. Specificity for underweight and overweight/obesity were respectively 82% and 97% when parents measured the children, and 75% and 93% with parent estimations.ConclusionsDiagnostic measures were more accurate when parents measured their child's weight and height at home than when those dimensions were based on parental judgements. When parent-reported data on an individual level is used, the accuracy could be improved by encouraging the parents to measure weight and height of their children at home.

BackgroundThe methodology used in the first Belgian food consumption survey followed to a large extent the instructions of the European Food Consumption (EFCOSUM) reports, where repeated 24-hour recalls (24HR) using EPIC-SOFT were recommended.ObjectivesTo evaluate the relative validity of two non-consecutive 24HR using EPIC-SOFT by comparison with 5-day estimated dietary records (EDR). To assess misreporting in energy for both methods by comparing energy intake with energy expenditure from accelerometery in a subsample.DesignA total of 175 subjects (aged 15 and over) were recruited to participate in the study. Repeated 24HR were performed with an interval of 2–8 weeks. After completion of the second interview, subjects were instructed to keep an EDR. Dietary intakes were adjusted for within-person variability to reflect usual intakes. A Student's t-test was calculated to assess differences between both methods. Spearman and Kappa correlation coefficients were used to investigate agreement.ResultsIn total, 127 subjects completed the required repeated 24HR, as well as the five record days. From 76 participants, accelerometer data were available. In both methods, about 35% of participants had ratios of Energy Intake/Total Energy Expenditure (EI/TEE) above or below 95% confidence intervals for EI/TEE, suggesting misreporting of energy. Significant differences between the two dietary intake methods were found for total energy, total fat, fatty acids, cholesterol, alcohol, vitamin C, thiamine, riboflavin and iron. In general, intakes from 24HR were higher compared to EDR. Correlation coefficients for all nutrients ranged from 0.16 for thiamine to 0.70 for water.ConclusionsThe results from this study show that in the context of nutritional surveillance, duplicate 24HR can be used to asses intakes of protein, carbohydrates, starch, sugar, water, potassium and calcium.