oru.sePublikationer
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Comparison between optical readable and open-ended weighed food records
Örebro University, School of Hospitality, Culinary Arts & Meal Science.
2009 (English)In: Food and Nutrition Research, ISSN 1654-6628, Vol. 53, no 1, p. 1-8Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: A simplified optically readable food record (ORFR) was developed and compared with an openended weighed record (WR). Objective: To compare intake of nutrients and foods using a seven-day ORFR with intake estimated using a seven-day WR. The results from each method were validated against 24-h urine nitrogen excretion and energy intake (EI)/estimated basal metabolic rate (BMR) cut-off values. Design: The study comprised 73 free-living, healthy 70-year-old Swedish men. Dietary data were collected during seven consecutive days, starting either with WR or ORFR. Results: Average intakes of energy and several nutrients were significantly lower when estimated using ORFR than when using WR. However, when adjusted for nutrient density, only a few nutrients were still lower with ORFR. Spearman correlation coefficients between the two methods regarding intakes of energy and energy-yielding nutrients were moderate to high, i.e. 0.4 0.6, while figures for most micro-nutrients were in the range 0.30.5. A large proportion of subjects under-reported their EIs, a higher proportion doing so when using ORFR. Protein intake obtained using ORFR was 31% lower than the values calculated from the 24-h urine nitrogen excretion, and 22% lower than those obtained from WR. Average intakes of milk, cheese and other milk products as well as coffee, tea and alcohol were significantly higher when estimated using ORFR than when using WR, while intakes of vegetables, meat and meat products, fish, bread and cereal products as well as number of sweet foods were significantly lower with ORFR. Conclusions: Based on these results, adjustments of some portion sizes in ORFR are suggested. In view of the advantages of ORFR with respect to lower response burden and rapid processing of data, such adjustments would make ORFR a suitable dietary assessment tool for use in dietary surveys, including larger resourcedemanding epidemiological investigations.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2009. Vol. 53, no 1, p. 1-8
Keyword [en]
Optically readable food record, Portion sizes, Urine nitrogen, Weighed registration
Research subject
Culinary Arts and Meal Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-14211DOI: 10.3402/fnr.v53i0.1889OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-14211DiVA: diva2:391561
Available from: 2011-01-25 Created: 2011-01-25 Last updated: 2017-10-17Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full texthttp://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-77953714047&partnerID=40&md5=a3a1b9a85b4b9f1ff252bcaac37b2315

Authority records BETA

Gustafsson, Inga-Britt

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Gustafsson, Inga-Britt
By organisation
School of Hospitality, Culinary Arts & Meal Science

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 159 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf