Assessing dietary intake

Who, what and why of under-reporting

Research output: Contribution to journalLiterature review

290 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Under-reporting of food intake is one of the fundamental obstacles preventing the collection of accurate habitual dietary intake data. The prevalence of under-reporting in large nutritional surveys ranges from 18 to 54 % of the whole sample, but can be as high as 70 % in particular subgroups. This wide variation between studies is partly due to different criteria used to identify under-reporters and also to non-uniformity of under-reporting across populations. The most consistent differences found are between men and women and between groups differing in body mass index. Women are more likely to under-report than men, and under-reporting is more common among overweight and obese individuals. Other associated characteristics, for which there is less consistent evidence, include age, smoking habits, level of education, social class, physical activity and dietary restraint.

Determining whether under-reporting is specific to macronutrients or food is problematic, as most methods identify only low energy intakes. Studies that have attempted to measure under-reporting specific to macronutrients express nutrients as percentage of energy and have tended to find carbohydrate under-reported and protein over-reported. However, care must be taken when interpreting these results, especially when data are expressed as percentages. A logical conclusion is that food items with a negative health image (e.g. cakes, sweets, confectionery) are more likely to be under-reported, whereas those with a positive health image are more likely to be over-reported (e.g. fruits and vegetables). This also suggests that dietary fat is likely to be under-reported.

However, it is necessary to distinguish between under-reporting and genuine under-eating for the duration of data collection. The key to understanding this problem, but one that has been widely neglected, concerns the processes that cause people to under-report their food intakes. The little work that has been done has simply confirmed the complexity of this issue. The importance of obtaining accurate estimates of habitual dietary intakes so as to assess health correlates of food consumption can be contrasted with the poor quality of data collected. This phenomenon should be considered a priority research area. Moreover, misreporting is not simply a nutritionist's problem, but requires a multidisciplinary approach (including psychology, sociology and physiology) to advance the understanding of under-reporting in dietary intake studies.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)231-253
Number of pages23
JournalNutrition Research Reviews
Volume11
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 11 Dec 1998

Keywords

  • DOUBLY LABELED WATER
  • FOOD-FREQUENCY QUESTIONNAIRES
  • NUTRITION EXAMINATION SURVEY
  • SOCIAL DESIRABILITY BIAS
  • MAINTAIN BODY-WEIGHT
  • LOW-ENERGY REPORTERS
  • NATIONAL-HEALTH
  • FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES
  • INCREASING PREVALENCE
  • NUTRIENT INTAKE

Cite this

Assessing dietary intake : Who, what and why of under-reporting. / Macdiarmid, Jennifer Isabel; Blundell, J .

In: Nutrition Research Reviews, Vol. 11, No. 2, 11.12.1998, p. 231-253.

Research output: Contribution to journalLiterature review

@article{20ee32e586524adca01c950a4733d406,
title = "Assessing dietary intake: Who, what and why of under-reporting",
abstract = "Under-reporting of food intake is one of the fundamental obstacles preventing the collection of accurate habitual dietary intake data. The prevalence of under-reporting in large nutritional surveys ranges from 18 to 54 {\%} of the whole sample, but can be as high as 70 {\%} in particular subgroups. This wide variation between studies is partly due to different criteria used to identify under-reporters and also to non-uniformity of under-reporting across populations. The most consistent differences found are between men and women and between groups differing in body mass index. Women are more likely to under-report than men, and under-reporting is more common among overweight and obese individuals. Other associated characteristics, for which there is less consistent evidence, include age, smoking habits, level of education, social class, physical activity and dietary restraint.Determining whether under-reporting is specific to macronutrients or food is problematic, as most methods identify only low energy intakes. Studies that have attempted to measure under-reporting specific to macronutrients express nutrients as percentage of energy and have tended to find carbohydrate under-reported and protein over-reported. However, care must be taken when interpreting these results, especially when data are expressed as percentages. A logical conclusion is that food items with a negative health image (e.g. cakes, sweets, confectionery) are more likely to be under-reported, whereas those with a positive health image are more likely to be over-reported (e.g. fruits and vegetables). This also suggests that dietary fat is likely to be under-reported.However, it is necessary to distinguish between under-reporting and genuine under-eating for the duration of data collection. The key to understanding this problem, but one that has been widely neglected, concerns the processes that cause people to under-report their food intakes. The little work that has been done has simply confirmed the complexity of this issue. The importance of obtaining accurate estimates of habitual dietary intakes so as to assess health correlates of food consumption can be contrasted with the poor quality of data collected. This phenomenon should be considered a priority research area. Moreover, misreporting is not simply a nutritionist's problem, but requires a multidisciplinary approach (including psychology, sociology and physiology) to advance the understanding of under-reporting in dietary intake studies.",
keywords = "DOUBLY LABELED WATER, FOOD-FREQUENCY QUESTIONNAIRES, NUTRITION EXAMINATION SURVEY, SOCIAL DESIRABILITY BIAS, MAINTAIN BODY-WEIGHT, LOW-ENERGY REPORTERS, NATIONAL-HEALTH, FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES, INCREASING PREVALENCE, NUTRIENT INTAKE",
author = "Macdiarmid, {Jennifer Isabel} and J Blundell",
year = "1998",
month = "12",
day = "11",
language = "English",
volume = "11",
pages = "231--253",
journal = "Nutrition Research Reviews",
issn = "0954-4224",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Assessing dietary intake

T2 - Who, what and why of under-reporting

AU - Macdiarmid, Jennifer Isabel

AU - Blundell, J

PY - 1998/12/11

Y1 - 1998/12/11

N2 - Under-reporting of food intake is one of the fundamental obstacles preventing the collection of accurate habitual dietary intake data. The prevalence of under-reporting in large nutritional surveys ranges from 18 to 54 % of the whole sample, but can be as high as 70 % in particular subgroups. This wide variation between studies is partly due to different criteria used to identify under-reporters and also to non-uniformity of under-reporting across populations. The most consistent differences found are between men and women and between groups differing in body mass index. Women are more likely to under-report than men, and under-reporting is more common among overweight and obese individuals. Other associated characteristics, for which there is less consistent evidence, include age, smoking habits, level of education, social class, physical activity and dietary restraint.Determining whether under-reporting is specific to macronutrients or food is problematic, as most methods identify only low energy intakes. Studies that have attempted to measure under-reporting specific to macronutrients express nutrients as percentage of energy and have tended to find carbohydrate under-reported and protein over-reported. However, care must be taken when interpreting these results, especially when data are expressed as percentages. A logical conclusion is that food items with a negative health image (e.g. cakes, sweets, confectionery) are more likely to be under-reported, whereas those with a positive health image are more likely to be over-reported (e.g. fruits and vegetables). This also suggests that dietary fat is likely to be under-reported.However, it is necessary to distinguish between under-reporting and genuine under-eating for the duration of data collection. The key to understanding this problem, but one that has been widely neglected, concerns the processes that cause people to under-report their food intakes. The little work that has been done has simply confirmed the complexity of this issue. The importance of obtaining accurate estimates of habitual dietary intakes so as to assess health correlates of food consumption can be contrasted with the poor quality of data collected. This phenomenon should be considered a priority research area. Moreover, misreporting is not simply a nutritionist's problem, but requires a multidisciplinary approach (including psychology, sociology and physiology) to advance the understanding of under-reporting in dietary intake studies.

AB - Under-reporting of food intake is one of the fundamental obstacles preventing the collection of accurate habitual dietary intake data. The prevalence of under-reporting in large nutritional surveys ranges from 18 to 54 % of the whole sample, but can be as high as 70 % in particular subgroups. This wide variation between studies is partly due to different criteria used to identify under-reporters and also to non-uniformity of under-reporting across populations. The most consistent differences found are between men and women and between groups differing in body mass index. Women are more likely to under-report than men, and under-reporting is more common among overweight and obese individuals. Other associated characteristics, for which there is less consistent evidence, include age, smoking habits, level of education, social class, physical activity and dietary restraint.Determining whether under-reporting is specific to macronutrients or food is problematic, as most methods identify only low energy intakes. Studies that have attempted to measure under-reporting specific to macronutrients express nutrients as percentage of energy and have tended to find carbohydrate under-reported and protein over-reported. However, care must be taken when interpreting these results, especially when data are expressed as percentages. A logical conclusion is that food items with a negative health image (e.g. cakes, sweets, confectionery) are more likely to be under-reported, whereas those with a positive health image are more likely to be over-reported (e.g. fruits and vegetables). This also suggests that dietary fat is likely to be under-reported.However, it is necessary to distinguish between under-reporting and genuine under-eating for the duration of data collection. The key to understanding this problem, but one that has been widely neglected, concerns the processes that cause people to under-report their food intakes. The little work that has been done has simply confirmed the complexity of this issue. The importance of obtaining accurate estimates of habitual dietary intakes so as to assess health correlates of food consumption can be contrasted with the poor quality of data collected. This phenomenon should be considered a priority research area. Moreover, misreporting is not simply a nutritionist's problem, but requires a multidisciplinary approach (including psychology, sociology and physiology) to advance the understanding of under-reporting in dietary intake studies.

KW - DOUBLY LABELED WATER

KW - FOOD-FREQUENCY QUESTIONNAIRES

KW - NUTRITION EXAMINATION SURVEY

KW - SOCIAL DESIRABILITY BIAS

KW - MAINTAIN BODY-WEIGHT

KW - LOW-ENERGY REPORTERS

KW - NATIONAL-HEALTH

KW - FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES

KW - INCREASING PREVALENCE

KW - NUTRIENT INTAKE

M3 - Literature review

VL - 11

SP - 231

EP - 253

JO - Nutrition Research Reviews

JF - Nutrition Research Reviews

SN - 0954-4224

IS - 2

ER -