1986
DOI: 10.1159/000412185
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dietary Fiber in the Polish Diet

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…All food assessment methods are limited by specific errors [1,2,3]. Therefore, the results obtained from the same respondents, but with other methods, can differ and make their interpretation difficult.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…All food assessment methods are limited by specific errors [1,2,3]. Therefore, the results obtained from the same respondents, but with other methods, can differ and make their interpretation difficult.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The food record is a prospective method, independent of the respondent’s memory and usually covers several consecutive days [1,2]. The limitations of this method include, among others, not taking into consideration the long-term variety of consumption, possible changes in dietary habits, and simplification of menus resulting from a significant burden on the respondents [1,2,4,5,6,7,8]. The size of error depends on the time of examination, and on the characteristics of the respondent (e.g., underestimation of intake is more common in women or persons after a slimming diet) [1,4,5,8].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…incorrectly selected method or measure, missing validation of the method, neglecting supplementation or unconventional nutrition patterns, long-term changes in human eating habits, improperiy selected interpretation criteria, application of various criteria of assessment in multi-centre studies, errors in calculating the results, partiality during the interview; (iv) a researcher, e.g. differences between researchers concerning application and interpretation of the method, improper protection of samples, partiality in collecting data, errors in coding, improper analysis of data, improper interpretation [Gibson, 2005;Goldberg et al, 1991;Goris et al 2000;Gronowska-Senger, 2009;Scagliusi et al, 2003]. Consequently, they make it difflcult to properly assess the energy and nutdtional value of diets.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%