Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by HARALDSDÓTTIR, JÓH.
Right arrow Articles by OVERVAD, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by HARALDSDÓTTIR, JÓH.
Right arrow Articles by OVERVAD, K.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1994 Oxford University Press

other

Validity of Individual Portion Size Estimates in a Food Frequency Questionnaire

JÓHANNA HARALDSDÓTTIR*, ANNE TJØNNELAND** and KIM OVERVAD{dagger}

* Research Department of Human Nutrition, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University Rolighedsvej 25, DK-1958 Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, Denmark
** Danish Cancer Registry, Institute of Cancer Epidemiology, Danish Canmer Society Strandboulevarden 49, PO Box 839, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark
{dagger} Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine, Aarhus University Høegh-Guldbergs Gade 8, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark

BackgroundDietary surveys often rely upon subjects' ability to estimate their portion sizes instead of weighing them, but information on the validity of such estimates is lacking. This study investigated the validity of estimated portion sizes from a self-administered food frequency questionnaire including photos.

MethodsValidity was evaluated by comparison with portion sizes from 14-day weighed food records. Eight sets of photos were included in the study (three meat dishes, one fish dish, three vegetables, potatoes), each set with four options. Subjects (59 men, 85 women) were 40–64 years.

ResultsThe majority of subjects (85–95%) selected the most correct photo or a neighbouring photo. However, regression analyses showed that the relationship between the estimated and the measured portion sizes was relatively weak for most of the foods tested, and correlations were only significant for three of the eight foods. This apparent contradiction was partly due to the pattern of the error: subjects selecting small portions had underestimated their actual portions while subjects selecting large portions had overestimated them. This error pattern could not be explained by the theoretical error resulting from the use of four discrete portion sizes instead of continuous weights, neither was it a simple consequence of the unidirectional errors at the extreme ends. Actual portion sizes varied from day to day, with intra-individual coefficients of variation of 34–40%.

ConclusionsThe photos used in the present study were of limited value for ranking individuals correctly according to their actual portion sizes. Whether this is a common feature of photos used in food frequency questionnaires remains to be answered.

Received 1 January 1994


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.