Objective-To validate a range of dietary assessment instruments in general
practice.
Methods-Using a randomised block design, brief assessment instruments and m
ore complex conventional dietary assessment tools were compared with an acc
epted "relative" standard-a seven day weighed dietary record. The standard
was checked using biomarkers, and by performing test-retest reliability in
additional subjects (n=29).
Outcomes-Agreement with weighed record. Percentage agreement with weighed r
ecord, rank correlation from scatter plot, rank correlation from Bland-Altm
an plot. Reliability of the weighed record.
Setting-Practice nurse treatment room in a single suburban general practice
.
Subjects-Patients with risk factors for cardiovascular disease (n=61) or ag
e/sex stratified general population group (n=50).
Results-Brief self completion dietary assessment tools based on food groups
eaten during a week show reasonable agreement with the relative standard.
For % energy from fat and saturated fat, non-starch polysaccharide, grams o
f fruit and vegetables and starchy foods consumed the range of agreement wi
th the standard was: median % difference -6% to 12%, rank correlation 0.5 t
o 0.6. This agreement is of a similar order to the reliability of the weigh
ed record, as good as or better than test standard agreement for more time
consuming instruments, and compares favourably with research instruments va
lidated in other settings. Underreporting of energy intake was common (40%)
and more likely if subjects were obese (body mass idex (BMI) greater than
or equal to 30 60% under-reported; BMI <30 29%, p<0.001).
Conclusion-Under-reporting of absolute energy intake is common, particularl
y among obese patients. Simple self assessment tools based on food groups,
designed for practice nurse dietary assessment, show acceptable agreement w
ith a standard, and suggest such tools are sufficiently accurate for clinic
al work, research, and possibly population dietary monitoring.