Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Relative bias in diet history measurements: a quality control technique for dietary intervention trials

  • Gina S Martin (a1), Linda C Tapsell (a1), Marijka J Batterham (a1) and Kenneth G Russell (a2)

Abstract

Objective:

Investigation of relative bias in diet history measurement during dietary intervention trials.

Design:

Retrospective analysis of human dietary data from two randomised controlled trials examining modified fat diets in the prevention and treatment of type II diabetes mellitus.

Setting:

Wollongong, Australia.

Subjects:

Thirty-five overweight, otherwise healthy subjects in trial 1 and 56 subjects with diabetes in trial 2.

Interventions:

Diet history interviews and three-day weighed food records administered at one-month intervals in trial 1 and three-month intervals in trial 2.

Results:

In a cross-sectional bias analysis, graphs of the association between bias and mean dietary intake showed that bias decreased in higher carbohydrate consumers in trial 1 ( r = −0.344, P<0.05 ). No other significant associations were found. In a longitudinal analysis, bias did not change over time in either trial. There were no significant differences in bias magnitudes between the trials, with the exception of monounsaturated fat measurement where bias was significantly greater and more positive in trial 2, indicating overestimation of monounsaturated fat intake with the diet history. Subjects in control and intervention groups underestimated energy, fat, saturated fat and alcohol intakes with the diet history in both trials. Overweight and obese individuals appeared to make the greatest contribution to the overall underestimation of saturated fat intake by the diet history regardless of whether they were in the control or intervention group and whether they were healthy or had diabetes.

Conclusion:

Bias in diet history measurement appears to be macronutrient-specific, with energy, fat and saturated fat consistently underreported in the interview by subjects with and without diabetes and in both intervention and control groups in a dietary intervention trial. Relative bias analysis appears to be an informative tool in quality control for dietary intervention trials when biochemical markers are unavailable.

    • 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.

      Relative bias in diet history measurements: a quality control technique for dietary intervention trials
      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.

      Relative bias in diet history measurements: a quality control technique for dietary intervention trials
      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.

      Relative bias in diet history measurements: a quality control technique for dietary intervention trials
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

Corresponding author

*Corresponding author: Email gmartin@uow.edu.au

References

Hide All
1Nikkari, T, Luukkainen, P, Pietinen, P, Puska, P. Fatty acid composition of serum lipid fractions in relation to gender and quality of dietary fat. Ann. Med. 1995; 27: 491–8.
2Bland, JM, Altman, DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1: 307–10.
3Bingham, SA. Limitations of the various methods for collecting dietary intake data. Ann. Nutr. Met. 1991; 35: 117–27.
4Hebert, JR, Clemow, L, Pbert, L, Ockene, IS, Ockene, JK. Social desirability bias in dietary self-report may compromise the validity of dietary intake measures. Int. J. Epidemiol. 1995; 24: 389–98.
5Rothenberg, E, Bosaeus, I, Lernfelt, B, Landahl, S, Steen, B. Energy intake and expenditure: validation of a diet history by heart rate monitoring, activity diary and doubly labeled water. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 1998; 52: 832–8.
6Heitmann, BL, Lissner, L, Osler, M. Do we eat less fat, or just report so? Int. J. Obes. Relat. Metab. Disord. 2000; 24: 435–42.
7Heitmann, BL, Lissner, L. Dietary underreporting by obese individuals – is it specific or non-specific? Br. Med. J. 1995; 311: 986–9.
8Tapsell, LC, Pettengell, K, Denmeade, SL. Assessment of a narrative approach to the diet history. Public Health Nutr. 1999; 2: 61–7.
9Tapsell, LC, Brenninger, V, Barnard, J. Applying conversation analysis to foster accurate reporting in a diet history interview. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 2000; 100: 818–24.
10Vessby, B, Uusitupa, M, Hermansen, K, Riccardi, G, Rivellese, AA, Tapsell, LC, Nalsen, C, Berglund, L, Louheranta, A, Rasmussen, BM, Calvert, GD, Maffetone, A, Pedersen, E, Gustafsson, IB, Storlien, LH, Study, K. Substituting dietary saturated for monounsaturated fat impairs insulin sensitivity in healthy men and women: The KANWU Study. Diabetologia 2001; 44: 312–9.
11Grootenhuis, PA, Westenbrink, S, Sie, CM, de Neeling, JN, Kok, FJ, Bouter, LM. A semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire for use in epidemiologic research among the elderly: validation by comparison with dietary history. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1995; 48: 859–68.
12Rothenberg, E, Bosaeus, I, Steen, B. Evaluation of energy intake estimated by a diet history in three free-living 70 year old populations in Gothenburg, Sweden. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 1997; 51: 60–6.
13Kortzinger, I, Bierwag, A, Mast, M, Muller, MJ. Dietary underreporting: validity of dietary measurements of energy intake using a 7-day dietary record and a diet history in non-obese subjects. Ann. Nutr. Met. 1997; 41: 3744.
14Delcourt, C, Cubeau, J, Balkau, B, Papoz, L. Limitations of the correlation coefficient in the validation of diet assessment methods. CODIAB–INSERM–ZENECA Pharma Study Group. Epidemiology 1994; 5: 518–24.
15De Vries, JHM, Lemmens, PHHM, Pietinen, P, Kok, FJ. Assessment of alcohol intake [abstract]. XIII International Congress of Dietetics, Edinburgh, 2000.
16Jarvinen, R, Seppanen, R, Knekt, P. Short-term and long-term reproducibility of dietary history interview data. Int. J. Epidemiol. 1993; 22: 520–7.
17Goris, AH, Westerterp-Plantenga, MS, Westerterp, KR. Undereating and underrecording of habitual food intake in obese men: selective underreporting of fat intake. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2000; 71: 130–4.
18Marlowe, D, Crowne, DP. Social desirability and perceived situational demands. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 1961; 25: 109–15.
19Worsley, A, Baghurst, KI, Leitch, DR. Social desirability response bias and dietary inventory responses. Hum. Nutr. Appl. Nutr. 1984; 38: 2935.
20Kristal, AR, Andrilla, CH, Koepsell, TD, Diehr, PH, Cheadle, A. Dietary assessment instruments are susceptible to intervention-associated response set bias. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 1998; 98: 40–3.
21Heitmann, BL. Social desirability bias in dietary self-report may compromise the validity of dietary intake measures. Implications for diet disease relationships. Int. J. Epidemiol. 1996; 25: 222–5.
22Hebert, JR, Ma, Y, Clemow, L, Ockene, IS, Saperia, G, Stanek, EJ III, Merriam, PA, Ockene, JK. Gender differences in social desirability and social approval bias in dietary self-report. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1997; 146: 1046–155.
23Steen, B, Isaksson, B, Svanborg, A. Intake of energy and nutrients and meal habits in 70-year old males and females in Gothenburg, Sweden: a population study. Acta Med. Scand. 1977; 611: 3986.
24Arnold, MS, Funnell, MM, Herman, WH, Brown, MB, Merritt, JH, Fogler, JM, Halter, JB. Discrepancies between perceived dietary changes and 4-day food records in older adults with diabetes. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 1996; 7: 705–7.
25Macdiarmid, JI, Blundell, JE. Dietary under-reporting: what people say about recording their food intake. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 1997; 51: 199200.

Keywords

Relative bias in diet history measurements: a quality control technique for dietary intervention trials

  • Gina S Martin (a1), Linda C Tapsell (a1), Marijka J Batterham (a1) and Kenneth G Russell (a2)

Metrics

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