Name:
Publisher version
View Source
Access full-text PDFOpen Access
View Source
Check access options
Check access options
Authors
Ma, YunshengOlendzki, Barbara C.
Pagoto, Sherry L.
Hurley, Thomas G.
Magner, Robert P.
Ockene, Ira S.
Schneider, Kristin L.
Merriam, Philip A.
Hebert, James R.
UMass Chan Affiliations
Clinical and Population Health Research ProgramDepartment of Medicine, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine
Department of Medicine, Division of Preventive and Behavioral Medicine
Document Type
Journal ArticlePublication Date
2009-07-07Keywords
Body Mass IndexData Collection
*Diet
*Energy Intake
Energy Metabolism
Female
Humans
*Mental Recall
Middle Aged
Socioeconomic Factors
Behavioral Disciplines and Activities
Behavior and Behavior Mechanisms
Community Health and Preventive Medicine
Preventive Medicine
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
PURPOSE: Twenty-four-hour diet recall interviews (24HRs) are used to assess diet and to validate other diet assessment instruments. Therefore it is important to know how many 24HRs are required to describe an individual's intake. METHOD: Seventy-nine middle-aged white women completed seven 24HRs over a 14-day period, during which energy expenditure (EE) was determined by the doubly labeled water method (DLW). Mean daily intakes were compared to DLW-derived EE using paired t tests. Linear mixed models were used to evaluate the effect of call sequence and day of the week on 24HR-derived energy intake while adjusting for education, relative body weight, social desirability, and an interaction between call sequence and social desirability. RESULTS: Mean EE from DLW was 2115 kcal/day. Adjusted 24HR-derived energy intake was lowest at call 1 (1501 kcal/day); significantly higher energy intake was observed at calls 2 and 3 (2246 and 2315 kcal/day, respectively). Energy intake on Friday was significantly lower than on Sunday. Averaging energy intake from the first two calls better approximated true energy expenditure than did the first call, and averaging the first three calls further improved the estimate (p=0.02 for both comparisons). Additional calls did not improve estimation. CONCLUSIONS: Energy intake is underreported on the first 24HR. Three 24HRs appear optimal for estimating energy intake.Source
Ann Epidemiol. 2009 Aug;19(8):553-9. Link to article on publisher's siteDOI
10.1016/j.annepidem.2009.04.010Permanent Link to this Item
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/44954PubMed ID
19576535Related Resources
Link to Article in PubMedae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1016/j.annepidem.2009.04.010