These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: An easy-to-use semiquantitative food record validated for energy intake by using doubly labelled water technique.
    Author: Koebnick C, Wagner K, Thielecke F, Dieter G, Höhne A, Franke A, Garcia AL, Meyer H, Hoffmann I, Leitzmann P, Trippo U, Zunft HJ.
    Journal: Eur J Clin Nutr; 2005 Sep; 59(9):989-95. PubMed ID: 16015274.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Estimating dietary intake is important for both epidemiological and clinical studies, but often lacks accuracy. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the accuracy and validity of energy intake estimated by an easy-to-use semiquantitative food record (EI(SQFR)) compared to total energy expenditure (TEE) estimated by doubly labelled water technique (EE(DLW)). DESIGN: TEE was measured in 29 nonobese subjects using the doubly labelled water method over a period of 14 days. Within this period, subjects reported their food consumption by a newly developed semiquantitative food record for 4 consecutive days. Energy intake was calculated using the German Food Code and Nutrition Data Base BLS II.3. RESULTS: A good correlation was observed between EI(SQFR) and EE(DLW) (r = 0.685, P < 0.001). The mean difference between EI(SQFR) and EE(DLW) was -1.7+/-2.6 MJ/day (-14+/-21%, P = 0.002). An underestimation of EI(SQFR) <10% was observed in nine subjects (31%), of 10-20% in six subjects (21%), and of >20% in nine subjects (31%). In five subjects (17%), an overestimation of EI(SQFR) was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The easy-to-use semiquantitative food record provided good estimates of EI in free-living and nonobese adults without prior detailed verbal instructions. The presented food record has limitations regarding accuracy at the individual level.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]