Plausible self-reported dietary intakes in a residential facility are not necessarily reliable

S. Whybrow, R. J. Stubbs, A. M. Johnstone, L. M. O'Reilly, Z. Fuller, M. B. E. Livingstone, G. W. Horgan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)
5 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Comparing reported energy intakes with estimated energy requirements as multiples of basal metabolic rate (Ein:BMR) is an established method of identifying implausible food intake records. The present study aimed to examine the validity of self-reported food intakes believed to be plausible. SUBJECTS/METHODS: One hundred and eighty men and women were provided with all food and beverages for two consecutive days in a residential laboratory setting. Subjects self-reported their food and beverage intakes using the weighed food diary method (WDR). Investigators covertly measured subjects’ actual consumption over the same period. Subjects also reported intakes over four consecutive days at home. BMR was measured by indirect calorimetry. RESULTS: Average reported energy intakes were significantly lower than actual intakes (11.2 and 11.8 MJ/d, respectively, Po0.001). Two-thirds (121) of the WDR were under-reported to varying degrees. Only five of these were considered as implausible using an Ein:BMR cut-off value of 1.03*BMR. Under-reporting of food and beverage intakes, as measured by the difference between reported and actual intake, was evident at all levels of Ein;BMR. Reported energy intakes were lower still (10.2 MJ/d) while subjects were at home. CONCLUSIONS: Under-recording of self-reported food intake records was extensive but very few under-reported food intake records were identified as implausible using energy intake to BMR ratios. Under-recording was evident at all levels of energy intake.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)130-135
Number of pages6
JournalEuropean Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Volume70
Issue number1
Early online date29 Jul 2015
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2016

Fingerprint

Residential Facilities
Energy Intake
Food and Beverages
Eating
Food
Indirect Calorimetry
Research Personnel

Cite this

Plausible self-reported dietary intakes in a residential facility are not necessarily reliable. / Whybrow, S.; Stubbs, R. J.; Johnstone, A. M.; O'Reilly, L. M.; Fuller, Z.; Livingstone, M. B. E.; Horgan, G. W.

In: European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 70, No. 1, 01.2016, p. 130-135.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Whybrow, S. ; Stubbs, R. J. ; Johnstone, A. M. ; O'Reilly, L. M. ; Fuller, Z. ; Livingstone, M. B. E. ; Horgan, G. W. / Plausible self-reported dietary intakes in a residential facility are not necessarily reliable. In: European Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2016 ; Vol. 70, No. 1. pp. 130-135.
@article{172d0d14b7d74522ab57c709b98f39ad,
title = "Plausible self-reported dietary intakes in a residential facility are not necessarily reliable",
abstract = "BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Comparing reported energy intakes with estimated energy requirements as multiples of basal metabolic rate (Ein:BMR) is an established method of identifying implausible food intake records. The present study aimed to examine the validity of self-reported food intakes believed to be plausible. SUBJECTS/METHODS: One hundred and eighty men and women were provided with all food and beverages for two consecutive days in a residential laboratory setting. Subjects self-reported their food and beverage intakes using the weighed food diary method (WDR). Investigators covertly measured subjects’ actual consumption over the same period. Subjects also reported intakes over four consecutive days at home. BMR was measured by indirect calorimetry. RESULTS: Average reported energy intakes were significantly lower than actual intakes (11.2 and 11.8 MJ/d, respectively, Po0.001). Two-thirds (121) of the WDR were under-reported to varying degrees. Only five of these were considered as implausible using an Ein:BMR cut-off value of 1.03*BMR. Under-reporting of food and beverage intakes, as measured by the difference between reported and actual intake, was evident at all levels of Ein;BMR. Reported energy intakes were lower still (10.2 MJ/d) while subjects were at home. CONCLUSIONS: Under-recording of self-reported food intake records was extensive but very few under-reported food intake records were identified as implausible using energy intake to BMR ratios. Under-recording was evident at all levels of energy intake.",
author = "S. Whybrow and Stubbs, {R. J.} and Johnstone, {A. M.} and O'Reilly, {L. M.} and Z. Fuller and Livingstone, {M. B. E.} and Horgan, {G. W.}",
note = "Acknowledgements The original study, from which the current data were taken, was funded by the Food Standards Agency, UK.",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1038/ejcn.2015.124",
language = "English",
volume = "70",
pages = "130--135",
journal = "European Journal of Clinical Nutrition",
issn = "0954-3007",
publisher = "NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Plausible self-reported dietary intakes in a residential facility are not necessarily reliable

AU - Whybrow, S.

AU - Stubbs, R. J.

AU - Johnstone, A. M.

AU - O'Reilly, L. M.

AU - Fuller, Z.

AU - Livingstone, M. B. E.

AU - Horgan, G. W.

N1 - Acknowledgements The original study, from which the current data were taken, was funded by the Food Standards Agency, UK.

PY - 2016/1

Y1 - 2016/1

N2 - BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Comparing reported energy intakes with estimated energy requirements as multiples of basal metabolic rate (Ein:BMR) is an established method of identifying implausible food intake records. The present study aimed to examine the validity of self-reported food intakes believed to be plausible. SUBJECTS/METHODS: One hundred and eighty men and women were provided with all food and beverages for two consecutive days in a residential laboratory setting. Subjects self-reported their food and beverage intakes using the weighed food diary method (WDR). Investigators covertly measured subjects’ actual consumption over the same period. Subjects also reported intakes over four consecutive days at home. BMR was measured by indirect calorimetry. RESULTS: Average reported energy intakes were significantly lower than actual intakes (11.2 and 11.8 MJ/d, respectively, Po0.001). Two-thirds (121) of the WDR were under-reported to varying degrees. Only five of these were considered as implausible using an Ein:BMR cut-off value of 1.03*BMR. Under-reporting of food and beverage intakes, as measured by the difference between reported and actual intake, was evident at all levels of Ein;BMR. Reported energy intakes were lower still (10.2 MJ/d) while subjects were at home. CONCLUSIONS: Under-recording of self-reported food intake records was extensive but very few under-reported food intake records were identified as implausible using energy intake to BMR ratios. Under-recording was evident at all levels of energy intake.

AB - BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Comparing reported energy intakes with estimated energy requirements as multiples of basal metabolic rate (Ein:BMR) is an established method of identifying implausible food intake records. The present study aimed to examine the validity of self-reported food intakes believed to be plausible. SUBJECTS/METHODS: One hundred and eighty men and women were provided with all food and beverages for two consecutive days in a residential laboratory setting. Subjects self-reported their food and beverage intakes using the weighed food diary method (WDR). Investigators covertly measured subjects’ actual consumption over the same period. Subjects also reported intakes over four consecutive days at home. BMR was measured by indirect calorimetry. RESULTS: Average reported energy intakes were significantly lower than actual intakes (11.2 and 11.8 MJ/d, respectively, Po0.001). Two-thirds (121) of the WDR were under-reported to varying degrees. Only five of these were considered as implausible using an Ein:BMR cut-off value of 1.03*BMR. Under-reporting of food and beverage intakes, as measured by the difference between reported and actual intake, was evident at all levels of Ein;BMR. Reported energy intakes were lower still (10.2 MJ/d) while subjects were at home. CONCLUSIONS: Under-recording of self-reported food intake records was extensive but very few under-reported food intake records were identified as implausible using energy intake to BMR ratios. Under-recording was evident at all levels of energy intake.

U2 - 10.1038/ejcn.2015.124

DO - 10.1038/ejcn.2015.124

M3 - Article

VL - 70

SP - 130

EP - 135

JO - European Journal of Clinical Nutrition

JF - European Journal of Clinical Nutrition

SN - 0954-3007

IS - 1

ER -