Comparative Validation of the Block, Willett, and National Cancer Institute Food Frequency Questionnaires

Clicks: 3
ID: 294525
2001
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #238 of 307 articles by views in american journal of epidemiology

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 307 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Researchers at the National Cancer Institute developed a new cognitively based food frequency questionnaire (FFQ), the Diet History Questionnaire (DHQ). The Eating at America's Table Study sought to validate and compare the DHQ with the Block and Willett FFQs. Of 1,640 men and women recruited to participate from a nationally representative sample in 1997, 1,301 completed four telephone 24-hour recalls, one in each season. Participants were randomized to receive either a DHQ and Block FFQ or a DHQ and Willett FFQ. With a standard measurement error model, correlations for energy between estimated truth and the DHQ, Block FFQ, and Willett FFQ, respectively, were 0.48, 0.45, and 0.18 for women and 0.49, 0.45, and 0.21 for men. For 26 nutrients, correlations and attenuation coefficients were somewhat higher for the DHQ versus the Block FFQ, and both were better than the Willett FFQ in models unadjusted for energy. Energy adjustment increased correlations and attenuation coefficients for the Willett FFQ dramatically and for the DHQ and Block FFQ instruments modestly. The DHQ performed best overall. These data show that the DHQ and the Block FFQ are better at estimating absolute intakes than is the Willett FFQ but that, after energy adjustment, all three are more comparable for purposes of assessing diet-disease risk.
Reference Key
openalex_W2087279974 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Amy F. Subar, Frances E. Thompson, Victor Kipnis, Douglas Midthune, Paul E. Hurwitz, Suzanne McNutt, Anna McIntosh, Simon Rosenfeld
Journal american journal of epidemiology
Year 2001
DOI
10.1093/aje/154.12.1089
URL
https://academic.oup.com/aje/article-pdf/154/12/1089/17153040/1089.1.pdf
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.