|
|
|
|
3 Applied Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, and 4 Biometry Program, Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892-7344; 5 Departments of Medicine, Clinical and Social Sciences in Psychology, Psychiatry, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14642; 6 Behavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892-7344; 7 Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Arnold School of Public Health and Cancer Prevention and Control Program, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208; 8 Health Behavior and Health Education, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2029; 9 Oregon Research Institute, Eugene, OR 97403; 10 Department of Nutrition and Food Sciences, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI 02881; and 11 Department of Nutrition and Department of Society, Human Development and Health, Harvard School of Public Health, Cambridge, MA 02115
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: thompsof{at}mail.nih.gov.
The need for an inexpensive measure of dietary intake in intervention studies led to evaluation of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Percentage Energy from Fat short instrument (PFat) in a subgroup of the Behavioral Change Consortium (BCC) intervention sites. The PFat's performance was evaluated using multiple nonconsecutive 24-h dietary recalls (24HR) as a reference instrument among participants at baseline in 4 demographically diverse intervention sites of the BCC. Mean estimates of percentage energy from fat for 24HR and PFat were within 2.1 percentage points of each other in all but 2 site/gender comparisons. 24HR and PFat estimates were not significantly different (P < 0.05) among men for 2 of 3 sites, and among women for 2 of 4 sites. Deattenuated Pearson correlation coefficients for the PFat and true intake (as estimated from the 24HR using a measurement error model) were significantly different from 0 (P < 0.05) for men and women in all sites, ranging from 0.52 to 0.77 among men and 0.36 to 0.59 among women. Besides gender and site, no other factors examined (age, education, smoking status, and BMI) consistently moderated validity estimates. If accurate assessment of diet at baseline (and presumably at follow-up) is essential, a more detailed instrument such as multiple 24HR may be warranted. The question of whether the PFat adequately measures change in diet is addressed in another article in this supplement.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
S. A. A. Beresford, L. M. Klesges, and H. R. H. Rockett Introduction J. Nutr., January 1, 2008; 138(1): 183S - 184S. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. L. Yaroch, L. Nebeling, F. E. Thompson, T. G. Hurley, J. R. Hebert, D. J. Toobert, K. Resnicow, G. W. Greene, G. C. Williams, D. L. Elliot, et al. Baseline Design Elements and Sample Characteristics for Seven Sites Participating in the Nutrition Working Group of the Behavior Change Consortium J. Nutr., January 1, 2008; 138(1): 185S - 192S. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. E. Davis, K. Resnicow, A. A. Atienza, K. E. Peterson, A. Domas, A. Hunt, T. G. Hurley, A. L. Yaroch, G. W. Greene, T. Goldman Sher, et al. Use of Signal Detection Methodology to Identify Subgroups of Dietary Supplement Use in Diverse Populations J. Nutr., January 1, 2008; 138(1): 205S - 211S. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. C. Williams, T. G. Hurley, F. E. Thompson, D. Midthune, A. L. Yaroch, K. Resnicow, D. J. Toobert, G. W. Greene, K. Peterson, L. Nebeling, et al. Performance of a Short Percentage Energy from Fat Tool in Measuring Change in Dietary Intervention Studies J. Nutr., January 1, 2008; 138(1): 212S - 217S. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. R. Hebert, T. G. Hurley, K. E. Peterson, K. Resnicow, F. E. Thompson, A. L. Yaroch, M. Ehlers, D. Midthune, G. C. Williams, G. W. Greene, et al. Social Desirability Trait Influences on Self-Reported Dietary Measures among Diverse Participants in a Multicenter Multiple Risk Factor Trial J. Nutr., January 1, 2008; 138(1): 226S - 234S. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||