The dietary intake of population groups may be assessed using food consumption level estimates on a national basis and household food surveys. These may be useful for monitoring secular trends and geographical differences with stable and well-documented populations, but analytical studies of diet and health require data on individuals. Assessment techniques designed to assess the diet of individuals ranging from records with weights of food to questionnaires and biological markers have been critically reviewed in order to assess the accuracy of each. Quantitative estimates of the errors involved will be given. For example, the co-efficients of variation of differences incurred from asking subjects to estimate the weight of food portions, rather than weighing them, may regularly be in the 50% range for foods and 20% for nutrients. A variety of studies suggests that the co-efficients of differences in nutrient intake estimated over 1 day from the 24-hour recall method when compared with observed intakes ranged from 4 to 400%. These errors are believed to be random, and precision can be improved by increasing the numbers of observations on each individual or by increasing the numbers of individuals within each group. However, a substantial loss of power is incurred with errors of this magnitude. A more serious potential source of error is systematic bias due either to differences between different methods of dietary assessment or from deliberate over- or underreporting by the subjects themselves. Studies with the doubly labelled water technique have suggested that substantial underrecording of food intake can occur both in free-living individuals and in athletes. 24-hour urine nitrogen can be used to validate dietary assessments in individuals in nitrogen balance, and on-going studies in Cambridge show that within a group, underreporting occurs in specific individuals rather than in the group as a whole. Independent methods of validating dietary assessments, such as the doubly labelled water technique or the 24-hour urine nitrogen output, must be included in any study of free-living individuals.

Keywords:
Diet, Urine collection, Energy, Nutritional epidemiology
This content is only available via PDF.
© 1991 S. Karger AG, Basel
1991
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.