Measuring the difference between actual and reported food intakes in the context of energy balance under laboratory conditions

R. James Stubbs, Leona M. O'Reilly, Stephen Whybrow, Zoe Fuller, Alexandra M. Johnstone, Barbara Livingstone, Patrick Ritz, Graham W. Horgan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

36 Citations (Scopus)
3 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract


To date, no study has directly and simultaneously measured the discrepancy between what people actually eat and what they report eating under observation in the context of energy balance (EB). The present study aimed to objectively measure the ‘extent’ and ‘nature’ of misreporting of dietary intakes under conditions in which EB and feeding behaviour were continuously monitored. For this purpose, a total of fifty-nine adults were recruited for 12 d, involving two 3 d overt phases and two 3 d covert phases of food intake measurement in a randomised cross-over design. Subjects had ad libitum access to a variety of familiar foods. Food intake was covertly measured using a feeding behaviour suite to establish actual energy and nutrient intakes. During the overt phases, subjects were instructed to self-report food intake using widely accepted methods. Misreporting comprised two separate and synchronous phenomena. Subjects decreased energy intake (EI) when asked to record their food intake (observation effect). The effect was significant in women ( − 8 %, P< 0·001) but not in men ( − 3 %, P< 0·277). The reported EI was 5 to 21 % lower (reporting effect) than the actual intake, depending on the reporting method used. Semi-quantitative techniques gave larger discrepancies. These discrepancies were identical in men and women and non-macronutrient specific. The ‘observation’ and ‘reporting’ effects combined to constitute total misreporting, which ranged from 10 to 25 %, depending on the intake measurement assessed. When studied in a laboratory environment and EB was closely monitored, subjects under-reported their food intake and decreased the actual intake when they were aware that their intake was being monitored.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2032 - 2043
Number of pages12
JournalBritish Journal of Nutrition
Volume111
Issue number11
Early online date17 Mar 2014
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2014

Fingerprint

Eating
Energy Intake
Observation
Feeding Behavior
Food
Cross-Over Studies
Self Report

Keywords

  • misreporting
  • under-reporting
  • under-eating
  • dietary intakes

Cite this

Measuring the difference between actual and reported food intakes in the context of energy balance under laboratory conditions. / Stubbs, R. James; O'Reilly, Leona M.; Whybrow, Stephen; Fuller, Zoe; Johnstone, Alexandra M.; Livingstone, Barbara; Ritz, Patrick; Horgan, Graham W.

In: British Journal of Nutrition, Vol. 111, No. 11, 06.2014, p. 2032 - 2043.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Stubbs, R. James ; O'Reilly, Leona M. ; Whybrow, Stephen ; Fuller, Zoe ; Johnstone, Alexandra M. ; Livingstone, Barbara ; Ritz, Patrick ; Horgan, Graham W. / Measuring the difference between actual and reported food intakes in the context of energy balance under laboratory conditions. In: British Journal of Nutrition. 2014 ; Vol. 111, No. 11. pp. 2032 - 2043.
@article{51010fc05f124f3a9aa25aca319b434d,
title = "Measuring the difference between actual and reported food intakes in the context of energy balance under laboratory conditions",
abstract = "To date, no study has directly and simultaneously measured the discrepancy between what people actually eat and what they report eating under observation in the context of energy balance (EB). The present study aimed to objectively measure the ‘extent’ and ‘nature’ of misreporting of dietary intakes under conditions in which EB and feeding behaviour were continuously monitored. For this purpose, a total of fifty-nine adults were recruited for 12 d, involving two 3 d overt phases and two 3 d covert phases of food intake measurement in a randomised cross-over design. Subjects had ad libitum access to a variety of familiar foods. Food intake was covertly measured using a feeding behaviour suite to establish actual energy and nutrient intakes. During the overt phases, subjects were instructed to self-report food intake using widely accepted methods. Misreporting comprised two separate and synchronous phenomena. Subjects decreased energy intake (EI) when asked to record their food intake (observation effect). The effect was significant in women ( − 8 {\%}, P< 0·001) but not in men ( − 3 {\%}, P< 0·277). The reported EI was 5 to 21 {\%} lower (reporting effect) than the actual intake, depending on the reporting method used. Semi-quantitative techniques gave larger discrepancies. These discrepancies were identical in men and women and non-macronutrient specific. The ‘observation’ and ‘reporting’ effects combined to constitute total misreporting, which ranged from 10 to 25 {\%}, depending on the intake measurement assessed. When studied in a laboratory environment and EB was closely monitored, subjects under-reported their food intake and decreased the actual intake when they were aware that their intake was being monitored.",
keywords = "misreporting, under-reporting, under-eating, dietary intakes",
author = "Stubbs, {R. James} and O'Reilly, {Leona M.} and Stephen Whybrow and Zoe Fuller and Johnstone, {Alexandra M.} and Barbara Livingstone and Patrick Ritz and Horgan, {Graham W.}",
note = "Acknowledgements The present study was funded by the Food Standards Agency, UK. The Food Standards Agency had no role in the design, analysis or writing of this article. The authors’ responsibilities were as follows: R. J. S., L. M. O’R. and G. W. H. designed the research; L. M. O’R. and Z. F. conducted the research and analysed the data; G. W. H. performed the statistical analyses; P. R. carried out the DLW analysis; R. J. S. had primary responsibility for the final content; R. J. S., L. M. O’R., Z. F., S. W. and M. B. E. L. wrote the paper.",
year = "2014",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1017/S0007114514000154",
language = "English",
volume = "111",
pages = "2032 -- 2043",
journal = "British Journal of Nutrition",
issn = "0007-1145",
publisher = "Cambridge Univ. Press.",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Measuring the difference between actual and reported food intakes in the context of energy balance under laboratory conditions

AU - Stubbs, R. James

AU - O'Reilly, Leona M.

AU - Whybrow, Stephen

AU - Fuller, Zoe

AU - Johnstone, Alexandra M.

AU - Livingstone, Barbara

AU - Ritz, Patrick

AU - Horgan, Graham W.

N1 - Acknowledgements The present study was funded by the Food Standards Agency, UK. The Food Standards Agency had no role in the design, analysis or writing of this article. The authors’ responsibilities were as follows: R. J. S., L. M. O’R. and G. W. H. designed the research; L. M. O’R. and Z. F. conducted the research and analysed the data; G. W. H. performed the statistical analyses; P. R. carried out the DLW analysis; R. J. S. had primary responsibility for the final content; R. J. S., L. M. O’R., Z. F., S. W. and M. B. E. L. wrote the paper.

PY - 2014/6

Y1 - 2014/6

N2 - To date, no study has directly and simultaneously measured the discrepancy between what people actually eat and what they report eating under observation in the context of energy balance (EB). The present study aimed to objectively measure the ‘extent’ and ‘nature’ of misreporting of dietary intakes under conditions in which EB and feeding behaviour were continuously monitored. For this purpose, a total of fifty-nine adults were recruited for 12 d, involving two 3 d overt phases and two 3 d covert phases of food intake measurement in a randomised cross-over design. Subjects had ad libitum access to a variety of familiar foods. Food intake was covertly measured using a feeding behaviour suite to establish actual energy and nutrient intakes. During the overt phases, subjects were instructed to self-report food intake using widely accepted methods. Misreporting comprised two separate and synchronous phenomena. Subjects decreased energy intake (EI) when asked to record their food intake (observation effect). The effect was significant in women ( − 8 %, P< 0·001) but not in men ( − 3 %, P< 0·277). The reported EI was 5 to 21 % lower (reporting effect) than the actual intake, depending on the reporting method used. Semi-quantitative techniques gave larger discrepancies. These discrepancies were identical in men and women and non-macronutrient specific. The ‘observation’ and ‘reporting’ effects combined to constitute total misreporting, which ranged from 10 to 25 %, depending on the intake measurement assessed. When studied in a laboratory environment and EB was closely monitored, subjects under-reported their food intake and decreased the actual intake when they were aware that their intake was being monitored.

AB - To date, no study has directly and simultaneously measured the discrepancy between what people actually eat and what they report eating under observation in the context of energy balance (EB). The present study aimed to objectively measure the ‘extent’ and ‘nature’ of misreporting of dietary intakes under conditions in which EB and feeding behaviour were continuously monitored. For this purpose, a total of fifty-nine adults were recruited for 12 d, involving two 3 d overt phases and two 3 d covert phases of food intake measurement in a randomised cross-over design. Subjects had ad libitum access to a variety of familiar foods. Food intake was covertly measured using a feeding behaviour suite to establish actual energy and nutrient intakes. During the overt phases, subjects were instructed to self-report food intake using widely accepted methods. Misreporting comprised two separate and synchronous phenomena. Subjects decreased energy intake (EI) when asked to record their food intake (observation effect). The effect was significant in women ( − 8 %, P< 0·001) but not in men ( − 3 %, P< 0·277). The reported EI was 5 to 21 % lower (reporting effect) than the actual intake, depending on the reporting method used. Semi-quantitative techniques gave larger discrepancies. These discrepancies were identical in men and women and non-macronutrient specific. The ‘observation’ and ‘reporting’ effects combined to constitute total misreporting, which ranged from 10 to 25 %, depending on the intake measurement assessed. When studied in a laboratory environment and EB was closely monitored, subjects under-reported their food intake and decreased the actual intake when they were aware that their intake was being monitored.

KW - misreporting

KW - under-reporting

KW - under-eating

KW - dietary intakes

U2 - 10.1017/S0007114514000154

DO - 10.1017/S0007114514000154

M3 - Article

VL - 111

SP - 2032

EP - 2043

JO - British Journal of Nutrition

JF - British Journal of Nutrition

SN - 0007-1145

IS - 11

ER -