Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research article

Validation of a self-administered web-based 24-hour dietary recall among pregnant women

Authors: Claudia Savard, Simone Lemieux, Jacynthe Lafrenière, Catherine Laramée, Julie Robitaille, Anne-Sophie Morisset

Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The use of valid dietary assessment methods is crucial to analyse adherence to dietary recommendations among pregnant women. This study aims to assess the relative validity of a self-administered Web-based 24-h dietary recall, the R24W, against a pen-paper 3-day food record (FR) among pregnant women.

Methods

Sixty (60) pregnant women recruited at 9.3 ± 0.7 weeks of pregnancy in Quebec City completed, at each trimester, 3 R24W and a 3-day FR. Mean energy and nutrient intakes reported by both tools were compared using paired Student T-Tests. Pearson correlations were used to analyze the association between both methods. Agreement between the two methods was evaluated using cross-classification analyses, weighted kappa coefficients and Bland-Altman analyses.

Results

Pearson correlation coefficients were all significant, except for vitamin B12 (r = 0.03; p = 0.83) and ranged from 0.27 to 0.76 (p < 0.05). Differences between mean intakes assessed by the R24W and the FR did not exceed 10% in 19 variables and were not significant for 16 out of 26 variables. In cross-classification analyses, the R24W ranked, on average, 79.1% of participants in the same or adjacent quartiles as the FR.

Conclusions

Compared to a 3-day FR, the R24W is a valid method to assess intakes of energy and most nutrients but may be less accurate in the evaluation of intakes of fat (as a proportion of energy intake), vitamin D, zinc and folic acid. During pregnancy, the R24W was a more accurate tool at a group-level than at an individual-level and should, therefore, be used in an epidemiological rather than a clinical setting. The R24W may be particularly valuable as a tool used in cohort studies to provide valid information on pregnant women’s dietary intakes and facilitate evaluation of associations between diet and adverse pregnancy outcomes.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Al Wattar BH, Mylrea-Lowndes B, Morgan C, Moore AP, Thangaratinam S. Use of dietary assessment tools in randomized trials evaluating diet-based interventions in pregnancy: a systematic review of literature. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2016;28(6):455–63.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Willet WC. Nutritional epidemiology. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2013.
3.
Kipnis V, Midthune D, Freedman LS, Bingham S, Schatzkin A, Subar A, Carroll RJ. Empirical evidence of correlated biases in dietary assessment instruments and its implications. Am J Epidemiol. 2001;153(4):394–403.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Symonds ME, Ramsay MM. Maternal-fetal nutrition during pregnancy and lactation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press edn; 2010.
5.
Kaiser L, Allen LH. Position of the American dietetic association: nutrition and lifestyle for a healthy pregnancy outcome. J Am Diet Assoc. 2008;108(3):553–61.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Whitney EN, Cataldo CB, Rolfes SR. Understanding normal and clinical nutrition. USA: Wadsworth ed; 2002.
7.
Augustine RA, Ladyman SR, Grattan DR. From feeding one to feeding many: hormone-induced changes in bodyweight homeostasis during pregnancy. JPhysiol. 2008;586(2):387–97.
8.
Fowles ER, Fowles SL. Healthy eating during pregnancy: determinants and supportive strategies. J Community Health Nurs. 2008;25(3):138–52.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Crozier SR, Inskip HM, Godfrey KM, Cooper C, Robinson SM, Group SWSS. Nausea and vomiting in early pregnancy: effects on food intake and diet quality. Matern Child Nutr. 2016;13(4):e12389.CrossRefPubMedCentral
10.
Hill B, Skouteris H, McCabe M, Milgrom J, Kent B, Herring SJ, Hartley-Clark L, Gale J. A conceptual model of psychosocial risk and protective factors for excessive gestational weight gain. Midwifery. 2013;29(2):110–4.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Fuller-Tyszkiewicz M, Skouteris H, Watson BE, Hill B. Body dissatisfaction during pregnancy: a systematic review of cross-sectional and prospective correlates. J Health Psychol. 2013;18(11):1411–21.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Bingham SA, Gill C, Welch A, Cassidy A, Runswick SA, Oakes S, Lubin R, Thurnham DI, Key TJ, Roe L, et al. Validation of dietary assessment methods in the UK arm of EPIC using weighed records, and 24-hour urinary nitrogen and potassium and serum vitamin C and carotenoids as biomarkers. Int J Epidemiol. 1997;26(Suppl 1):S137–51.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Coulston AM, Boushey CJ. Nutrition in the prevention and treatment of disease. Amsterdam: Academic Press; 2008.
14.
Kipnis V, Midthune D, Freedman L, Bingham S, Day NE, Riboli E, Ferrari P, Carroll RJ. Bias in dietary-report instruments and its implications for nutritional epidemiology. Public Health Nutr. 2002;5(6A):915–23.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Arens-Volland AG, Spassova L, Bohn T. Promising approaches of computer-supported dietary assessment and management-current research status and available applications. Int J Med Inform. 2015;84(12):997–1008.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Illner AK, Freisling H, Boeing H, Huybrechts I, Crispim SP, Slimani N. Review and evaluation of innovative technologies for measuring diet in nutritional epidemiology. Int J Epidemiol. 2012;41(4):1187–203.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Kristal AR, Kolar AS, Fisher JL, Plascak JJ, Stumbo PJ, Weiss R, Paskett ED. Evaluation of web-based, self-administered, graphical food frequency questionnaire. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2014;114(4):613–21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Foster E, Hawkins A, Simpson E, Adamson AJ. Developing an interactive portion size assessment system (IPSAS) for use with children. J Hum Nutr Diet. 2014;27(Suppl 1):18–25.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Naska A, Lagiou A, Lagiou P. Dietary assessment methods in epidemiological research: current state of the art and future prospects. F1000Res. 2017;6:926.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
21.
Butte NF, King JC. Energy requirements during pregnancy and lactation. Public Health Nutr. 2005;8(7A):1010–27.PubMed
22.
Shatenstein B, Xu H, Luo ZC, Fraser W. Relative validity of a food frequency questionnaire for pregnant women. Can J Diet Pract Res. 2011;72(2):60–9.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Gibson RS. Principles of nutritional assessment. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2005.
24.
Ashman AM, Collins CE, Brown LJ, Rae KM, Rollo ME. Validation of a smartphone image-based dietary assessment method for pregnant women. Nutrients. 2017;9(1):73.CrossRefPubMedCentral
25.
Jacques S, Lemieux S, Lamarche B, Laramee C, Corneau L, Lapointe A, Tessier-Grenier M, Robitaille J. Development of a web-based 24-h dietary recall for a French-Canadian population. Nutrients. 2016;8(11):724.CrossRefPubMedCentral
26.
Moshfegh AJ, Rhodes DG, Baer DJ, Murayi T, Clemens JC, Rumpler WV, Paul DR, Sebastian RS, Kuczynski KJ, Ingwersen LA, et al. The US Department of Agriculture Automated Multiple-Pass Method reduces bias in the collection of energy intakes. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008;88(2):324–32.CrossRefPubMed
27.
28.
Lafrenière J, Lamarche B, Laramée C, et al. Validation of a newly automated web-based 24-hour dietary recall using fully controlled feeding studies. BMC Nutr. 2017;3:34.CrossRef
29.
Lombard MJ, Steyn NP, Charlton KE, Senekal M. Application and interpretation of multiple statistical tests to evaluate validity of dietary intake assessment methods. Nutr J. 2015;14:40.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
Vezina-Im LA, Godin G, Couillard C, Perron J, Lemieux S, Robitaille J. Validity and reliability of a brief self-reported questionnaire assessing fruit and vegetable consumption among pregnant women. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:982.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
Masson LF, McNeill G, Tomany JO, Simpson JA, Peace HS, Wei L, Grubb DA, Bolton-Smith C. Statistical approaches for assessing the relative validity of a food-frequency questionnaire: use of correlation coefficients and the kappa statistic. Public Health Nutr. 2003;6(3):313–21.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Taren D, Dwyer J, Freedman L, Solomons NW. Dietary assessment methods: where do we go from here? Public Health Nutr. 2002;5(6A):1001–3.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1(8476):307–10.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Frankenfeld CL, Poudrier JK, Waters NM, Gillevet PM, Xu Y. Dietary intake measured from a self-administered, online 24-hour recall system compared with 4-day diet records in an adult US population. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2012;112(10):1642–7.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Timon CM, Blain RJ, McNulty B, Kehoe L, Evans K, Walton J, Flynn A, Gibney ER. The development, validation, and user evaluation of Foodbook24: a web-based dietary assessment tool developed for the Irish adult population. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19(5):e158.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
36.
Comrie F, Masson LF, McNeill G. A novel online food recall checklist for use in an undergraduate student population: a comparison with diet diaries. Nutr J. 2009;8:13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
37.
38.
Nelson M, Atkinson M, Darbyshire S. Food photography. I: the perception of food portion size from photographs. Br J Nutr. 1994;72(5):649–63.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Ovaskainen ML, Paturi M, Reinivuo H, Hannila ML, Sinkko H, Lehtisalo J, Pynnonen-Polari O, Mannisto S. Accuracy in the estimation of food servings against the portions in food photographs. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2008;62(5):674–81.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Turconi G, Guarcello M, Berzolari FG, Carolei A, Bazzano R, Roggi C. An evaluation of a colour food photography atlas as a tool for quantifying food portion size in epidemiological dietary surveys. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2005;59(8):923–31.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Block G. A review of validations of dietary assessment methods. Am J Epidemiol. 1982;115(4):492–505.CrossRefPubMed
42.
Latva-Pukkila U, Isolauri E, Laitinen K. Dietary and clinical impacts of nausea and vomiting during pregnancy. J Hum Nutr Diet. 2010;23(1):69–77.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Mantovani E, Filippini F, Bortolus R, Franchi M. Folic acid supplementation and preterm birth: results from observational studies. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:481914.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
44.
45.
Green NS. Folic acid supplementation and prevention of birth defects. J Nutr. 2002;132(8 Suppl):2356S–60S.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Validation of a self-administered web-based 24-hour dietary recall among pregnant women
Authors
Claudia Savard
Simone Lemieux
Jacynthe Lafrenière
Catherine Laramée
Julie Robitaille
Anne-Sophie Morisset
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2393
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-018-1741-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 1/2018 Go to the issue

Research article

Future risk of metabolic syndrome in women with a previous LGA delivery stratified by gestational glucose tolerance: a prospective cohort study

Case report

Delayed Lactogenesis II and potential utility of antenatal milk expression in women developing late-onset preeclampsia: a case series

Case report

Coexisting ovarian and tubal pregnancies on opposite sides after intrauterine insemination: a case report

Research article

Obstetrical outcomes after vaginal repair of caesarean scar diverticula in reproductive-aged women

Research article

Caesarean section rate and cost control effectiveness of case payment reform in the new cooperative medical scheme for delivery: evidence from Xi County, China

Research article

Predictors of maternal near miss among women admitted in Gurage zone hospitals, South Ethiopia, 2017: a case control study