Empirical Evidence of Correlated Biases in Dietary Assessment Instruments and Its Implications
Open Access
- 15 February 2001
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in American Journal of Epidemiology
- Vol. 153 (4) , 394-403
- https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/153.4.394
Abstract
Multiple-day food records or 24-hour recalls are currently used as “reference” instruments to calibrate food frequency questionnaires (FFQs) and to adjust findings from nutritional epidemiologic studies for measurement error. The common adjustment is based on the critical requirements that errors in the reference instrument be independent of those in the FFQ and of true intake. When data on urinary nitrogen level, a valid reference biomarker for nitrogen intake, are used, evidence suggests that a dietary report reference instrument does not meet these requirements. In this paper, the authors introduce a new model that includes, for both the FFQ and the dietary report reference instrument, group-specific biases related to true intake and correlated person-specific biases. Data were obtained from a dietary assessment validation study carried out among 160 women at the Dunn Clinical Nutrition Center, Cambridge, United Kingdom, in 1988–1990. Using the biomarker measurements and dietary report measurements from this study, the authors compare the new model with alternative measurement error models proposed in the literature and demonstrate that it provides the best fit to the data. The new model suggests that, for these data, measurement error in the FFQ could lead to a 51% greater attenuation of true nutrient effect and the need for a 2.3 times larger study than would be estimated by the standard approach. The implications of the results for the ability of FFQ-based epidemiologic studies to detect important diet-disease associations are discussed. Am J Epidemiol 2001;153:394–403.Keywords
This publication has 44 references indexed in Scilit:
- Implications of a New Dietary Measurement Error Model for Estimation of Relative Risk: Application to Four Calibration StudiesAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 1999
- Dietary Fiber and the Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Adenoma in WomenNew England Journal of Medicine, 1999
- Cohort Studies of Fat Intake and the Risk of Breast Cancer — A Pooled AnalysisNew England Journal of Medicine, 1996
- THE IMPACT OF DIETARY MEASUREMENT ERROR ON PLANNING SAMPLE SIZE REQUIRED IN A COHORT STUDYAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 1990
- Validity of reported energy intake in obese and nonobese adolescentsThe American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1990
- Accuracy of weighed dietary records in studies of diet and health.BMJ, 1990
- Correction of logistic regression relative risk estimates and confidence intervals for systematic within‐person measurement errorStatistics in Medicine, 1989
- INTERVAL ESTIMATES FOR CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS CORRECTED FOR WITHIN-PERSON VARIATION: IMPLICATIONS FOR STUDY DESIGN AND HYPOTHESIS TESTINGAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 1988
- The problem of profound mismeasurement and the power of epidemiological studies of diet and cancerNutrition and Cancer, 1988
- Sources of variance in 24-hour dietary recall data: implications for nutrition study design and interpretationThe American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1979