Though diet quality is widely recognised as linked to risk of chronic disease, health systems have been challenged to find a user-friendly, efficient way to obtain information about diet. The Penn Healthy Diet (PHD) survey was designed to fill this void. The purposes of this pilot project were to assess the patient experience with the PHD, to validate the accuracy of the PHD against related items in a diet recall and to explore scoring algorithms with relationship to the Healthy Eating Index (HEI)-2015 computed from the recall data. A convenience sample of participants in the Penn Health BioBank was surveyed with the PHD, the Automated Self-Administered 24-hour recall (ASA24) and experience questions. Kappa scores and Spearman correlations were used to compare related questions in the PHD to the ASA24. Numerical scoring, regression tree and weighted regressions were computed for scoring. Participants assessed the PHD as easy to use and were willing to repeat the survey at least annually. The three scoring algorithms were strongly associated with HEI-2015 scores using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2017–2018 data from which the PHD was developed and moderately associated with the pilot replication data. The PHD is acceptable to participants and at least moderately correlated with the HEI-2015. Further validation in a larger sample will enable the selection of the strongest scoring approach.

NutriProfiel® is a tool to measure micronutrient status and to assess diet quality. It consists of measurement of micronutrient status in blood and a short food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) (‘Eetscore-FFQ’). Based on the results, individuals receive a dietary advice. In this study, we evaluated the application of NutriProfiel in athletes (‘NutriProfiel-Sport’) by assessing the coverage of nutrient intake of the Eetscore-FFQ (part 1) and by evaluating athlete's dietary behaviour after using NutriProfiel-Sport and their satisfaction with this tool (part 2). For part 1, data of 419 athletes were used. We evaluated the coverage of nutrient intake of the Eetscore-FFQ using first and second MOMents (MOM1 and MOM2) sum scores of food items in the questionnaire. Forty-eight athletes were involved in part 2. They gave blood samples for micronutrient status measurement and were asked to complete the Eetscore-FFQ at baseline and after 3 months, as well as a questionnaire on their satisfaction with NutriProfiel-Sport. Results showed that for most nutrients, MOM1 and MOM2 scores were above 80 %, meaning that nutrient intake was sufficiently covered by the Eetscore-FFQ. No difference in diet quality was observed between baseline and after 3 months. Nevertheless, a majority of athletes reported the NutriProfiel-Sport results and advice as useful. On a scale from 0 to 10, NutriProfiel-Sport was graded with a mean (±sd) score of 7⋅6 (±0⋅8). In conclusion, NutriProfiel-Sport is a potential valuable and appreciated tool for athletes and the Eetscore-FFQ as part of this tool sufficiently covers nutrient intake in athletes.

The Eetscore FFQ was developed to score the Dutch Healthy Diet index 2015 (DHD2015-index) representing the Dutch food-based dietary guidelines of 2015. This paper describes the development of the Eetscore FFQ, a short screener assessing diet quality, examines associations between diet quality and participants’ characteristics, and evaluates the relative validity and reproducibility of the Eetscore FFQ in a cross-sectional study with Dutch adults. The study sample consisted of 751 participants, aged 19–91 years, recruited from the EetMeetWeet research panel. The mean DHD2015-index score based on the Eetscore FFQ of the total sample was 111 (sd 17·5) out of a maximum score of 160 points and was significantly higher in women than in men, positively associated with age and education level, and inversely associated with BMI. The Kendall’s tau-b coefficient of the DHD2015-index between the Eetscore FFQ and the full-length FFQ (on average 1·7-month interval, n 565) was 0·51 (95 % CI 0·47, 0·55), indicating an acceptable ranking ability. The intraclass correlation coefficient between DHD2015-index scores derived from two repeated Eetscore FFQ (on average 3·8-month interval, n 343) was 0·91 (95 % CI 0·89, 0·93) suggesting a very good reproducibility. In conclusion, the Eetscore FFQ was considered acceptable in ranking participants according to their diet quality compared with the full-length FFQ and showed good to excellent reproducibility.