We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please 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 account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items 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 saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved 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.
To assess the validity of a 161-item quantitative FFQ (QFFQ) that was developed to evaluate dietary risk factors for a colorectal adenoma case–control study.
Design
A cross-sectional validation study of the QFFQ against 4 d food diary using Pearson correlation coefficients, cross-classification, weighted κ statistics and Bland–Altman plotting.
Setting
Two hospitals in São Paulo, Brazil.
Subjects
Ninety-seven healthy Japanese-Brazilian adults (40–75 years) were recruited. One participant was excluded from the analysis due to unusual energy intake report.
Results
Mean daily nutrient intakes from the QFFQ were higher than from the food diary. The mean Pearson correlation coefficient for nutrient intakes between the QFFQ and the average of the 4 d food diary was 0·43, and increased to 0·45 after correcting correlations for attenuation due to residual day-to-day variation in the food diary measurements. Adjustment for total energy and further adjustment for age and gender decreased the correlation; however, 77 % of observations remained in the same or adjacent quartiles with a mean weighted κ of 0·22. Bland–Altman plots on loge-transformed data showed no linear trend between the differences and means for energy, fat, protein, total folate and vitamin C. Compared with the food diary, the QFFQ showed consistently reasonable performance for dietary fibre, total folate, retinol, riboflavin and vitamin C.
Conclusions
This investigation supports the relative validity of the QFFQ as a method for assessing long-term dietary intake. The instrument will be a useful tool in the analysis of diet–adenoma associations in the case–control study.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.