A comparison of selected nutrient intakes derived from three diet assessment methods used in a low-fat maintenance trial

Objective: In the vast majority of surveys and research in humans, dietary data are obtained from self-reports: recalls; records; or historical methods, usually food frequency questionnaires (FFQ). This study provides a rare opportunity to compare data derived from all three methods. Design: A crossover study of dietary fat in which data were collected using an average of 11.4 food records and 11.7 24-h diet recalls. Using simple subtraction and correlation, energy and nutrient intakes derived from the three methods were compared to each other and with those derived from a single FFQ. Analysis of variance was used to evaluate sources of variability in nutrient intakes estimated from the individual days of records and recalls. Setting: An independent, free-standing medical research institute. Subjects: 13 men who were compliant with study procedures. Results: FFQ-derived estimates of energy and nutrient intake were highest (eg 1967 kcal versus 1858 kcal and 1936 kcal for the records and recalls, respectively). Mean differences in energy and nutrient intakes and their variances were lowest and correlation coefficients highest in comparing the records and recalls (e. g. for fat the mean difference was 5.0 g, and r = 0.85). Analysis of variance of individual days of record- and recall-derived data (n = 300) revealed that there was no effect due to either method (record or recall) or the sequence of administration. Conclusions: Results of this study indicate that the FFQ overestimated dietary intake. Energy and nutrient results obtained from the records and recalls were interchangeable. However, based on smaller SDs around the means, it appears that the recalls may perform slightly better in estimating dietary intake in groups such as these well-educated, highly compliant men.