Validity and relative validity of a novel digital approach for 24-h dietary recall in athletes

Nutrition Journal

Asker E Jeukendrup²  Ryan P Nuccio¹  Kimberly W Stein¹  Lisa E Heaton¹  Lindsay B Baker¹ 

[1] Gatorade Sports Science Institute, 617 W. Main St., Barrington, IL 60010, USA;School of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK

关键词: Team sports;    Dietary observations;    Protein;    Carbohydrate;    Energy intake;   

Others  :  801482
DOI  :  10.1186/1475-2891-13-41

 received in 2013-10-22, accepted in 2014-04-21,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

We developed a digital dietary analysis tool for athletes (DATA) using a modified 24-h recall method and an integrated, customized nutrient database. The purpose of this study was to assess DATA’s validity and relative validity by measuring its agreement with registered dietitians’ (RDs) direct observations (OBSERVATION) and 24-h dietary recall interviews using the USDA 5-step multiple-pass method (INTERVIEW), respectively.

Methods

Fifty-six athletes (14–20 y) completed DATA and INTERVIEW in randomized counter-balanced order. OBSERVATION (n = 26) consisted of RDs recording participants’ food/drink intake in a 24-h period and were completed the day prior to DATA and INTERVIEW. Agreement among methods was estimated using a repeated measures t-test and Bland-Altman analysis.

Results

The paired differences (with 95% confidence intervals) between DATA and OBSERVATION were not significant for carbohydrate (10.1%, -1.2–22.7%) and protein (14.1%, -3.2–34.5%) but was significant for energy (14.4%, 1.2–29.3%). There were no differences between DATA and INTERVIEW for energy (-1.1%, -9.1–7.7%), carbohydrate (0.2%, -7.1–8.0%) or protein (-2.7%, -11.3–6.7%). Bland-Altman analysis indicated significant positive correlations between absolute values of the differences and the means for OBSERVATION vs. DATA (r = 0.40 and r = 0.47 for energy and carbohydrate, respectively) and INTERVIEW vs. DATA (r = 0.52, r = 0.29, and r = 0.61 for energy, carbohydrate, and protein, respectively). There were also wide 95% limits of agreement (LOA) for most method comparisons. The mean bias ratio (with 95% LOA) for OBSERVATION vs. DATA was 0.874 (0.551-1.385) for energy, 0.906 (0.522-1.575) for carbohydrate, and 0.895(0.395-2.031) for protein. The mean bias ratio (with 95% LOA) for INTERVIEW vs. DATA was 1.016 (0.538-1.919) for energy, 0.995 (0.563-1.757) for carbohydrate, and 1.031 (0.514-2.068) for protein.

Conclusion

DATA has good relative validity for group-level comparisons in athletes. However, there are large variations in the relative validity of individuals’ dietary intake estimates from DATA, particularly in athletes with higher energy and nutrient intakes. DATA can be a useful athlete-specific, digital alternative to conventional 24-h dietary recall methods at the group level. Further development and testing is needed to improve DATA’s validity for estimations of individual dietary intakes.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Baker et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Rodriguez NR, DiMarco NM, Langley S, American Dietetic A: Position of the American Dietetic Association, Dietitians of Canada, and the American College of Sports Medicine: Nutrition and athletic performance. J Am Diet Assoc 2009, 109:509-527.
• [2]Holway FE, Spriet LL: Sport-specific nutrition: practical strategies for team sports. J Sports Sci 2011, 29(Suppl 1):S115-S125.
• [3]Grandjean AC: Macronutrient intake of US athletes compared with the general population and recommendations made for athletes. Am J Clin Nutr 1989, 49:1070-1076.
• [4]Moshfegh AJ, Rhodes DG, Baer DJ, Murayi T, Clemens JC, Rumpler WV, Paul DR, Sebastian RS, Kuczynski KJ, Ingwersen LA, Staples RC, Cleveland LE: The US Department of Agriculture Automated Multiple-pass method reduces bias in the collection of energy intakes. Am J Clin Nutr 2008, 88:324-332.
• [5]Conway JM, Ingwersen LA, Vinyard BT, Moshfegh AJ: Effectiveness of the US Department of Agriculture 5-step multiple-pass method in assessing food intake in obese and nonobese women. Am J Clin Nutr 2003, 77:1171-1178.
• [6]Conway JM, Ingwersen LA, Moshfegh AJ: Accuracy of dietary recall using the USDA five-step multiple-pass method in men: an observational validation study. J Am Diet Assoc 2004, 104:595-603.
• [7]Cotton MA, Ball C, Robinson P: Four simple questions can help screen for eating disorders. J Gen Intern Med 2003, 18:53-56.
• [8]Baglio ML, Baxter SD, Guinn CH, Thompson WO, Shaffer NM, Frye FH: Assessment of interobserver reliability in nutrition studies that use direct observation of school meals. J Am Diet Assoc 2004, 104:1385-1392.
• [9]Harris J, Benedict F: A Biometric Study of Basal Metabolsim in Man. Philidelphia, PA: F.B. Lippincott Co.; 1919.
• [10]McArdle ED, Katch FI, Katch VL: Exercise Physiology. 5th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, Williams, and Wilkins; 2004.
• [11]Ainsworth BE, Haskell WL, Herrmann SD, Meckes N, Bassett DR Jr, Tudor-Locke C, Greer JL, Vezina J, Whitt-Glover MC, Leon AS: Compendium of physical activities: a second update of codes and MET values. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2011, 2011(43):1575-1581.
• [12]Bland JM, Altman DG: Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986, 1:307-310.
• [13]Atkinson G, Nevill AM: Statistical methods for assessing measurement error (reliability) in variables relevant to sports medicine. Sports Med 1998, 26:217-238.
• [14]Braakhuis AJ, Hopkins WG, Lowe TE, Rush EC: Development and validation of a food-frequency questionnaire to assess short-term antioxidant intake in athletes. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab 2011, 21:105-112.
• [15]Pedisic Z, Bender DV, Durakovic MM: Construction and reproducibility of a questionnaire aimed for evaluation of dietary habits in physically active individuals. Coll Antropol 2008, 32:1069-1077.
• [16]Ward KD, Hunt KM, Berg MB, Slawson DA, Vukadinovich CM, McClanahan BS, Clemens LH: Reliability and validity of a brief questionnaire to assess calcium intake in female collegiate athletes. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab 2004, 14:209-221.
• [17]Hill RJ, Davies PS: The validity of self-reported energy intake as determined using the doubly labeled water technique. Br J Nutr 2001, 85:415-430.
• [18]Burke LM, Loucks AB, Broad N: Energy and carbohydrate for training and recovery. J Sports Sci 2006, 24:675-685.
• [19]Johnson RK, Driscoll P, Goran MI: Comparison of multiple-pass 24-hour recall estimates of energy intake with total energy expenditure determined by the doubly labeled water method in young children. J Am Diet Assoc 1996, 96:1140-1144.
• [20]Smith AF, Baxter SD, Hardin JW, Nichols MD: Conventional analyses of data from dietary validation studies may misestimate reporting accuracy: illustration from a study of the effect of interview modality on children's reporting accuracy. Public Health Nutr 2007, 10:1247-1256.
• [21]Edwards JE, Lindeman AK, Mikesky AE, Stager JM: Energy balance in highly trained female endurance runners. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1993, 25:1398-1404.
• [22]Schulz LO, Alger S, Harper I, Wilmore JH, Ravussin E: Energy expenditure of elite female runners measured by respiratory chamber and doubly labeled water. J Appl Physiol 1992, 72:23-28.
• [23]Davies PSW, Feng J, Crisp JA, Day JME, Laidlaw A, Chen J, Liu X: Total energy expenditure and physical activity in young Chinese gymnasts. Pediatr Exerc Sci 1997, 9:243-252.
• [24]Hill RJ, Davies PS: The validity of a four day weighed food record for measuring energy intake in female classical ballet dancers. Eur J Clin Nutr 1999, 53:752-753.
• [25]Westerterp KR, Meijer GA, Janssen EM, Saris WH, Ten Hoor F: Long-term effect of physical activity on energy balance and body composition. Br J Nutr 1992, 68:21-30.
• [26]Schoeller DA: Limitations in the assessment of dietary energy intake by self-report. Metabolism 1995, 44:18-22.