Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Evaluation of under- and overreporting of energy intake in the 24-hour diet recalls in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)

  • P Ferrari (a1), N Slimani (a1), A Ciampi (a2), A Trichopoulou (a3), A Naska (a3), C Lauria (a4), F Veglia (a5), HB Buenode-Mesquita (a6), MC Ocke (a6), M Brustad (a7), T Braaten (a7), M José Tormo (a8), P Amiano (a9), I Mattisson (a10), G Johansson (a11), A Welch (a12), G Davey (a13), K Overvad (a14), A Tjønneland (a15), F Clavel-Chapelon (a16), A Thiebaut (a16), J Linseisen (a17), H Boeing (a18), B Hemon (a1) and E Riboli (a1)...

Abstract

Objective:

To evaluate under- and overreporting and their determinants in the EPIC 24-hour diet recall (24-HDR) measurements collected in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC).

Design:

Cross-sectional analysis. 24-HDR measurements were obtained by means of a standardised computerised interview program (EPIC-SOFT). The ratio of reported energy intake (EI) to estimated basal metabolic rate (BMR) was used to ascertain the magnitude, impact and determinants of misreporting. Goldberg's cut-off points were used to identify participants with physiologically extreme low or high energy intake. At the aggregate level the value of 1.55 for physical activity level (PAL) was chosen as reference. At the individual level we used multivariate statistical techniques to identify factors that could explain EI/BMR variability. Analyses were performed by adjusting for weight, height, age at recall, special diet, smoking status, day of recall (weekday vs. weekend day) and physical activity.

Setting:

Twenty-seven redefined centres in the 10 countries participating in the EPIC project.

Subjects:

In total, 35955 men and women, aged 35–74 years, participating in the nested EPIC calibration sub-studies.

Results:

While overreporting has only a minor impact, the percentage of subjects identified as extreme underreporters was 13.8% and 10.3% in women and men, respectively. Mean EI/BMR values in men and women were 1.44 and 1.36 including all subjects, and 1.50 and 1.44 after exclusion of misreporters. After exclusion of misreporters, adjusted EI/BMR means were consistently less than 10% different from the expected value of 1.55 for PAL (except for women in Greece and in the UK), with overall differences equal to 4.0% and 7.4% for men and women, respectively. We modelled the probability of being an underreporter in association with several individual characteristics. After adjustment for age, height, special diet, smoking status, day of recall and physical activity at work, logistic regression analyses resulted in an odds ratio (OR) of being an underreporter for the highest vs. the lowest quartile of body mass index (BMI) of 3-52 (95% confidence interval (CD 2.91–4.26) in men and 4.80 (95% CI 4.11–5.6l) in women, indicating that overweight subjects are significantly more likely to underestimate energy intake than subjects in the bottom BMI category. Older people were less likely to underestimate energy intake: ORs were 0.58 (95% CI 0.45–0.77) and 0.74 (95% CI 0.63–0.88) for age (≥ 65 years vs. < 50 years). Special diet and day of the week showed strong effects.

Conclusion:

EI tends to be underestimated in the vast majority of the EPIC centres, although to varying degrees; at the aggregate level most centres were below the expected reference value of 1.55. Underreporting seems to be more prevalent among women than men in the EPIC calibration sample. The hypothesis that BMI (or weight) and age are causally related to underreporting seems to be confirmed in the present work. This introduces further complexity in the within-group (centre or country) and between-group calibration of dietary questionnaire measurements to deattenuate the diet—disease relationship.

    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Evaluation of under- and overreporting of energy intake in the 24-hour diet recalls in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Evaluation of under- and overreporting of energy intake in the 24-hour diet recalls in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Evaluation of under- and overreporting of energy intake in the 24-hour diet recalls in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

Corresponding author

*Corresponding author: Email Ferrari@iarc.fr

References

Hide All
1Riboli, E, Kaaks, R. The EPIC Project: rationale and study design. European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. Int. J. Epidemiol. 1997; 26(Suppl. 1): S6–14.
2Riboli, E, Hunt, KJ, Slimani, N, Ferrari, P, Norat, T, Fahey, M et al. European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutri tion (EPIC): study populations and data collection. Public Health Nutr. 2002; 5(6B): 1113–24.
3Willett, W. An overview of issues related to the correction of non-differential exposure measurement error in epidemiologic studies. Stat.Med. 1989; 8: 1031–40, discussion 1071–3.
4Rosner, B, Willett, WC, Spiegelman, D. Correction of logistic regression relative risk estimates and confidence intervals for systematic within-person measurement error. Stat. Med. 1989; 8: 1051–69.
5Bingham, SA, Cassidy, A, Cole, TJ, Welch, A, Runswick, SA, Black, AE et al. Validation of weighed records and other methods of dietary assessment using the 24 h urine nitrogen technique and other biological markers. Br.J. Nutr. 1995; 73: 531–50.
6Black, AE, Bingham, SA, Johansson, G, Coward, WA. Validation of dietary intakes of protein and energy against 24 hour urinary N and DLW energy expenditure in middle-aged women, retired men and post-obese subjects: comparisons with validation against presumed energy requirements. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 1997; 51: 405–13.
7Riboli, E, Kaaks, R. The challenge of multi-center cohort studies in the search for diet and cancer links [invited commentary). Am.J. Epidemiol. 2000; 151: 371–4.
8Slimani, N, Deharveng, G, Charrondière, RU, van Kappel, AL, Ocké, MC, Welch, A et al. Structure of the standardized computerized 24-h diet recall interview used as reference method in the 22 centers participating in the EPIC project. European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. Comput. Meth. Programs Biomed. 1999; 58: 251–66.
9Black, AE, Welch, AA, Bingham, SA. Validation of dietary intakes measured by diet history against 24 h urinary nitrogen excretion and energy expenditure measured by the doubly-labelled water method in middle-aged women. Br.J. Nutr. 2000; 83: 341–54.
10Goldberg, GR, Black, AE, Jebb, SA, Cole, TJ, Murgatroyd, PR, Coward, WA, Prentice, AM. Critical evaluation of energy 1341 intake data using fundamental principles of energy physiology: 1. Derivation of cut-off limits to identify under-recording. Eur.J. Clin. Nutr. 1991; 45: 569–81.
11Black, AE. Critical evaluation of energy intake using the Goldberg cut-off for energy intake: basal metabolic rate. A practical guide to its calculation, use and limitations. Int. J. Obes. Relat. Metab. Disord. 2000; 24: 1119–30.
12Kaaks, R, Riboli, E, van Staveren, W.Sample size requirements for calibration studies of dietary intake measurements in prospective cohort investigations. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1995; 142: 557–65.
13Slimani, N, Kaaks, R, Ferrari, P, Casagrande, C, Clavel-Chapelon, F, Lotze, G et al. European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) calibration study: rationale, design and population characteristics. Public Health Nutr. 2002; 5(6B): 1125–45.
14Charrondière, UR, Vignat, J, Møller, A, Ireland, J, Becker, W, Church, S et al. The European Nutrient Database (ENDB) for nutritional epidemiology. J. Food Comp. Anal. 2002; 15(4): 435–51.
15Deharveng, G, Charrondière, UR, Slimani, N, Southgate, DA, Riboli, E.Comparison of nutrients in the food composition tables available in the nine European countries participating in EPIC. European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. Eur.J. Clin. Nutr. 1999; 53: 6079.
16Schofield, WN, Scofield, C, James, WPT.Basal metabolic rate. Hum. Nutr. Clin. Nutr. 1985; 39C(Suppl. 1): 196.
17Haftenberger, M, Schuit, AJ, Tormo, MJ, Boeing, H, Wareham, N, Bueno-de-Mesquita, HB et al. Physical activity of subjects aged 50-64 years involved in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC). Public Health Nutr. 2002; 5(6B): 1163–77.
18Black, AE. The sensitivity and the specificity of the Goldberg cut-off for EI:BMR for identifying diet reports of poor validity. Eur.J. Clin. Nutr. 2000; 51: 405–13.
19Gnardellis, C, Boulou, C, Trichopoulou, A. Magnitude, determinants and impact of under-reporting of energy intake in a cohort study in Greece. Public Health Nutr. 1998; 1: 131–7.
20SAS Institute, Inc. SAS/STAT User's Guide: Version 8.2. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc., 2001.
21Slimani, N, Bingham, S, Runswick, S, Ferrari, P, Day, N, Welch, A et al. Group level validation of protein intakes estimated by 24-hour diet recall and dietary questionnaires against 24-hour urinary nitrogen in the EPIC calibration study. Submitted for publication.
22Zhang, J, Temme, EH, Kesteloot, H. Sex ratio of total energy intake in adults: an analysis of dietary surveys. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 1999; 53: 542–51.
23Hebert, JR, Ma, Y, Clemow, L, Ockene, IS, Sapetia, G, Stane, EJ 3rd et al. Gender differences in social desirability and social approval bias in dietary self-report. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1997; 146: 1046–55.
24Black, AE, Prentice, AM, Goldberg, GR, Jebb, SA, Bingham, SA, Livingstone, MB et al. Measurements of total energy expenditure provide insights into the validity of dietary measurements of energy intake. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 1993; 93: 572–9.
25Voss, S, Kroke, A, Klipstein-Grobusch, K, Boeing, H.Is macronutrient composition of dietary intake data affected by underreporting? Results from the EPIC—Potsdam Study. European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. Eur.J Clin. Nutr. 1998; 52: 119–26.
26Bandini, LG, Schoeller, DA, Cyr, HN, Dietz, WH. Validity of reported energy intake in obese and nonobese adolescents. Am.J. Clin. Nutr. 1990; 52: 421–5.
27Heitmann, BL.The influence of fatness, weight change, slimming history and other lifestyle variables on diet reporting in Danish men and women aged 35–65 years. Int.J Obes. 1993; 17: 329–36.
28Heitmann, BL, Lissner, L.Dietary underreporting by obese individuals – is it specific or non- specific? Br. Med.J. 1995; 311: 986–9.
29Kaaks, R, Riboli, E, van Staveren, W.Calibration of dietary intake measurements in prospective cohort studies. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1995; 142: 548–56.
30Kaaks, R, Riboli, E.Validation and calibration of dietary intake measurements in the EPIC project: methodological considerations. European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. Int.J. Epidemiol. 1997; 26(Suppl. 1): S15–25.
31Kipnis, V, Carroll, RJ, Freedman, LS, Li, L.A new dietary measurement error model and its implications for the estimation of relative risk: application to four calibration studies. Am.J. Epidemiol. 1999; 150: 642–51.
32Prentice, R.Measurement error and results from analytic epidemiology: dietary fat and breast cancer. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 1996; 88: 1738–47.
33Kipnis, V, Ferrari, P, Riboli, E, Slimani, N, Midthune, D, Carroll, RJ et al. Attenuation (bias towards the null) in risk and its dependence on body mass index: results from calibration studies using the urinary nitrogen excretion biomarker. Manuscript in preparation.

Keywords

Related content

Powered by UNSILO

Evaluation of under- and overreporting of energy intake in the 24-hour diet recalls in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)

  • P Ferrari (a1), N Slimani (a1), A Ciampi (a2), A Trichopoulou (a3), A Naska (a3), C Lauria (a4), F Veglia (a5), HB Buenode-Mesquita (a6), MC Ocke (a6), M Brustad (a7), T Braaten (a7), M José Tormo (a8), P Amiano (a9), I Mattisson (a10), G Johansson (a11), A Welch (a12), G Davey (a13), K Overvad (a14), A Tjønneland (a15), F Clavel-Chapelon (a16), A Thiebaut (a16), J Linseisen (a17), H Boeing (a18), B Hemon (a1) and E Riboli (a1)...

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.