Abstract:Background Measuring dietary intake is difficult, and strategies that enable researchers to select the most appropriate dietary assessment tools are needed. The aim of this work was to improve the quality of dietary data collected in epidemiological studies. Therefore, the DIETary Assessment Tools NETwork (DIET@NET) partnership, a network of scientific experts, has created the Nutritools website. Methods Development of the Nutritools website was divided into three strands: creation of best practice guidelines,… Show more
“…This is a freely available website aiming to provide non-nutritional epidemiologist experts, researchers and practitioners guidance and support in identifying and accessing the most appropriate dietary assessment tools for their study. The Nutritools website ( 35 ) provides several features including Best Practice Guidelines (BPG) for dietary assessment research ( 36 ) , to assist researchers and public health practitioners. Fig.…”
Section: Overview Of Dietary Assessment Toolkitsmentioning
Objective
A wide variety of methods are available to assess dietary intake,
each one with different strengths and weaknesses. Researchers face multiple
challenges when diet and nutrition need to be accurately assessed, in
particular in the selection of the most appropriate dietary assessment
method for their study. The goal of this collaborative work is to present a
collection of available resources for dietary assessment implementation.
Design
As a follow up to the 9th International Conference on Diet and
Physical Activity Methods held in 2015, developers of dietary assessment
toolkits agreed to collaborate in the preparation of the present article,
which provides an overview of each toolkit.
The toolkits presented include: The Diet, Anthropometry and Physical
Activity Measurement Toolkit (DAPA) (UK); The National Cancer
Institute’s Dietary Assessment Primer (USA); The Nutritools website
(UK); the Australasian Child and Adolescent Obesity Research Network
(ACAORN) method selector (Australia), and the Danone Dietary Assessment
Toolkit (DanoneDAT) (France). An at-a-glance summary of features and
comparison of the toolkits is provided.
Setting
Not applicable
Subjects
Not applicable
Results
The resulting article contains general background on dietary
assessment, along with a summary of each of the included toolkits, a feature
comparison table, and direct links to each toolkit, all of which are freely
available online.
Conclusions
This overview of dietary assessment toolkits provides comprehensive
information to aid users in the selection and implementation of the most
appropriate dietary assessment method, or combination of methods, with the
goal of collecting the highest quality dietary data possible.
“…This is a freely available website aiming to provide non-nutritional epidemiologist experts, researchers and practitioners guidance and support in identifying and accessing the most appropriate dietary assessment tools for their study. The Nutritools website ( 35 ) provides several features including Best Practice Guidelines (BPG) for dietary assessment research ( 36 ) , to assist researchers and public health practitioners. Fig.…”
Section: Overview Of Dietary Assessment Toolkitsmentioning
Objective
A wide variety of methods are available to assess dietary intake,
each one with different strengths and weaknesses. Researchers face multiple
challenges when diet and nutrition need to be accurately assessed, in
particular in the selection of the most appropriate dietary assessment
method for their study. The goal of this collaborative work is to present a
collection of available resources for dietary assessment implementation.
Design
As a follow up to the 9th International Conference on Diet and
Physical Activity Methods held in 2015, developers of dietary assessment
toolkits agreed to collaborate in the preparation of the present article,
which provides an overview of each toolkit.
The toolkits presented include: The Diet, Anthropometry and Physical
Activity Measurement Toolkit (DAPA) (UK); The National Cancer
Institute’s Dietary Assessment Primer (USA); The Nutritools website
(UK); the Australasian Child and Adolescent Obesity Research Network
(ACAORN) method selector (Australia), and the Danone Dietary Assessment
Toolkit (DanoneDAT) (France). An at-a-glance summary of features and
comparison of the toolkits is provided.
Setting
Not applicable
Subjects
Not applicable
Results
The resulting article contains general background on dietary
assessment, along with a summary of each of the included toolkits, a feature
comparison table, and direct links to each toolkit, all of which are freely
available online.
Conclusions
This overview of dietary assessment toolkits provides comprehensive
information to aid users in the selection and implementation of the most
appropriate dietary assessment method, or combination of methods, with the
goal of collecting the highest quality dietary data possible.
“…The primary difference between EFRs and 24-h recalls is that with 24-h recalls the dietary data is collected through an open-ended interview typically by a trained dietitian, with a key feature being that more detailed information requested from the respondent where appropriate than first reported [4,5]. EFR are a prospective, self-administered method that aim to capture a participant's short-term food and drink intake over one or more 24-h period [3,6]. Traditionally participants receive a paper-based recording form with written instructions [7].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Depending on the research requirements, recording of further information may be requested. These may include details of the time of consumption, eating occasion, eating location, brand information, and cooking and preparation methods [3,6]. In this manner, EFR in comparison to habitual diet measures such as Food Frequency Questionnaires (FFQs) allow for the contextual evaluation of meal and snack patterns and other eating habits such as the impact of location (e.g.…”
Background
Estimated food records (EFR) are a common dietary assessment method. This investigation aimed to; (1) define the reporting quality of the EFR, (2) characterise acute dietary intake and eating behaviours, (3) describe diet heritability.
Methods
A total of 1974 one-day EFR were collected from 1858 participants in the TwinsUK cohort between 2012 and 2017. EFR were assessed using a six-point scoring system to determine reporting quality. The frequency and co-occurrence of food items was examined using word clouds and co-occurrence networks. The impact of eating behaviours on weight, BMI and nutrient intake were explored using mixed-effect linear regression models. Finally, diet heritability was estimated using ACE modelling.
Results
We observed that 75% of EFR are of acceptable reporting quality (score > 5). Black tea and semi-skimmed milk were the most consumed items, on an individual basis (respectively 8.27, 6.25%) and paired (0.21%) as co-occurring items. Breakfast consumption had a significantly (p = 5.99 × 10− 7) greater impact on energy (kcal) (mean 1874.67 (±SD 532.42)) than skipping breakfast (1700.45 (±SD 620.98)), however only length of eating window was significantly associated with body weight (kg) (effect size 0.21 (±SD 0.10), p = 0.05) and BMI (effect size 0.08 (±SD 0.04), p = 0.04) after adjustment for relevant covariates. Lastly, we reported that both length of eating window (h2 = 33%, CI 0.24; 0.41), and breakfast consumption (h2 = 11%, CI 0.02; 0.21) were weakly heritable.
Conclusions
EFR describing acute dietary intake allow for eating behaviour characterisation and can supplement habitual diet intake assessments. Novel findings of heritability warrant further investigation.
“…The Nutritools website (1) , www.nutritools.org, was developed using 3 approaches. 1) Creation of Best Practice Guidelines (2) , enabling researchers to choose the most appropriate DAT for their work.…”
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
