Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T03:29:57.591Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Validation of a food-frequency questionnaire for use in pregnancy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2007

Theodora Mouratidou ,
Fiona Ford  and
Robert B Fraser
Theodora Mouratidou*
Affiliation:
Academic Unit of Reproductive and Developmental Medicine, University of Sheffield, Level 4, The Jessop Wing, Tree Root Walk, Sheffield S10 2SF, UK
Fiona Ford
Affiliation:
Academic Unit of Reproductive and Developmental Medicine, University of Sheffield, Level 4, The Jessop Wing, Tree Root Walk, Sheffield S10 2SF, UK
Robert B Fraser
Affiliation:
Academic Unit of Reproductive and Developmental Medicine, University of Sheffield, Level 4, The Jessop Wing, Tree Root Walk, Sheffield S10 2SF, UK
*
*Corresponding author: Email t.mouratidou@sheffield.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objectives

As a part of an ongoing project to develop a nutritional screening tool, we evaluated the performance of a semi-quantitative food-frequency questionnaire (FFQ) in terms of validity in a Sheffield Caucasian pregnant population using two different statistical approaches – the correlation coefficient and the limits of agreement (LOA). The FFQ was designed specifically for pregnant women and previously used in a large-scale study.

Design

A validation study.

Setting

A community-based field study of a general population of pregnant women booked for their first antenatal appointment at the Jessop Wing, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK.

Subjects

One hundred and twenty-three women of different socio-economic status, aged between 17 and 43 years, provided complete dietary data.

Results

The validity of the FFQ was tested against a series of two 24-hour recalls. As expected, the intakes of all examined nutrients, except for iodine, carotene, vitamin E, biotin, vitamin C and alcohol, were higher when determined by the FFQ than when determined by 24-hour recall. Pearson's correlation coefficient between the two methods ranged from 0.19 (added sugar, zinc) to 0.47 (Englyst fibre). The LOA were broader for some of the nutrients, e.g. protein, Southgate fibre and alcohol, and an increasing lack of agreement between the two methods was identified with higher dietary intakes.

Conclusions

The FFQ gave useful estimates of the nutrient intakes of Caucasian pregnant women and appears to be a valid tool for categorising pregnant women according to dietary intake. The FFQ performed well for most nutrients and had acceptable agreement with the 24-hour recall.

Keywords

Food frequency methodPregnancyValidationDietNutritional screening
Type
Research Article
Information
Public Health Nutrition , Volume 9 , Issue 4 , June 2006 , pp. 515 - 522
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2006

References

1Chaudhari, S, Otiv, M, Chitale, A, Pandit, A, Hoge, M. Pune low birth weight study – cognitive abilities and educational performance at twelve years. Indian Pediatrics 2004; 41(2): 121–8.Google ScholarPubMed
2Barker, DJ, Gluckman, PD, Godfrey, KM, Harding, JE, Owens, JA, Robinson, JS. Fetal nutrition and cardiovascular disease in adult life. Lancet 1993; 341(8850): 938–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3Barker, DJ, Osmond, C, Golding, J, Kuh, D, Wadsworth, ME. Growth in utero, blood pressure in childhood and adult life, and mortality from cardiovascular disease. British Medical Journal 1989; 298(6673): 564–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4Dewan, N, Brabin, B, Wood, L, Dramond, S, Cooper, C. The effects of smoking on birth weight-for-gestational-age curves in teenage and adult primigravidae. Public Health 2003; 117(1): 31–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5Spencer, N, Logan, S. Social influences on birth weight. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2002; 56(5): 326–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6Moser, K, Li, L, Power, C. Social inequalities in low birth weight in England and Wales: trends and implications for population health. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2003; 57(9): 687–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7Bull, J, Mulvihille, C, Quigley, R. Prevention of Low Birth Weight: Assessing the Effectiveness of Smoking Cessation and Nutritional Intervention – Evidence Briefing. London: Health Development Agency, 07 2003.Google Scholar
8Rogers, I, Emmett, P, Baker, D, Golding, J. Financial difficulties, smoking habits, composition of the diet and birth weight in a population of pregnant women in the South West of England. ALSPAC Study Team. Avon Longitudinal Study of Pregnancy and Childhood. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 1998; 52(4): 251–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9Gregory, J, Foster, K, Tyler, H, Wiseman, M. The Dietary and Nutritional Survey of British Adults. London: HMSO, 1990.Google Scholar
10Darmon, N, Ferguson, EL, Briend, A. A cost constraint alone has adverse effects on food selection and nutrient density: an analysis of human diets by linear programming. Journal of Nutrition 2002; 132(12): 3764–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11Ward, J, Close, J, Little, J, Boorman, J, Perkins, A, Close, SJ. Development of a screening tool for assessing risk of under nutrition in patients in community. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics 1998; 11: 323–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12Wright, L. A nutritional screening tool for use by nurses in residential and nursing homes for elderly people: development and pilot study results. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics 1999; 12: 437–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13McNulty, KY, Adams, CH, Anderson, JM, Affenito, SG. Development and validation of a screening tool to identify eating disorders in female athletes. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 2001; 101(8): 886–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14Shu, X, Yang, G, Jin, F, Liu, D, Kushi, L, Wen, W, et al. Validity and reproducibility of the food frequency questionnaire used in the Shanghai Women's Health Study. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2004; 58(1): 17–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15Katsouyanni, K, Rimm, EB, Gnardellis, C, Trichopoulos, D, Polychronopoulos, E, Trichopoulou, A. Reproducibility and relative validity of an extensive semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire using dietary records and biochemical markers among Greek schoolteachers. International Journal of Epidemiology 1997; 26(Suppl. 1): S118–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16Friis, S, Kruger Kjaer, S, Stripp, C, Overvad, K. Reproducibility and relative validity of a self-administered semi quantitative food frequency questionnaire applied to younger women. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1997; 50(3): 303–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17Chacko-George, G, Milani, T, Hans-Nuss, H, Kim, M-S, Freeland-Graves, JH. Development and validation of a semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire for young adult women in the southwestern United States. Nutrition Research 2004; 24: 29–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18Rogers, I, Emmett, P. Diet during pregnancy in a population of pregnant women in South West England. ALSPAC Study Team. Avon Longitudinal Study of Pregnancy and Childhood. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 1998; 52(4): 246–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19Margetts, B, Nelson, M. Design Concepts in Nutritional Epidemiology, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20Tinuviel Software. Q-Builder Users Manual. Version 1.0; Questionnaire Design and Intake Analysis System. Warrington, UK: Tinuviel Software, 2002.Google Scholar
21Tinuviel Software. WISP Users Manual. Version 3.0; Intake and Recipe Analysis System. Warrington, UK: Tinuviel Software, 2003.Google Scholar
22Bland, JM, Altman, DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurements. Lancet 1986; 1(8476): 307–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23Huxley, RR. Nausea and vomiting in early pregnancy: its role in placental development. Obstetrics and Gynecology 2000; 95(5): 779–82.Google ScholarPubMed
24Suitor, CJ, Gardner, J, Willett, WC. A comparison of food frequency and diet recall methods in studies of nutrient intake of low-income pregnant women. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 1989; 89(12): 1786–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25Wei, EK, Gardner, J, Field, AE, Rosner, BA, Colditz, GA, Suitor, CW. Validity of a food frequency questionnaire in assessing nutrient intakes of low-income pregnant women. Maternal and Child Health Journal 1999; 3(4): 241–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26Robinson, S, Godfrey, K, Osmond, C, Cox, V, Barker, D. Evaluation of a food frequency questionnaire used to assess nutrient intakes in pregnant women. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 1996; 50(5): 302–8.Google ScholarPubMed
27Erkkola, M, Karppinen, M, Javanainen, J, Rasanen, L, Knip, M, Virtanen, SM. Validity and reproducibility of a food frequency questionnaire for pregnant Finnish women. American Journal of Epidemiology 2001; 154(5): 466–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28Willet, WC. Nutritional Epidemiology, 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29Andersen, LF, Lande, B, Trygg, K, Hay, G. Validation of a semi-quantitative food-frequency questionnaire used among 2-year-old Norwegian children. Public Health Nutrition 2004; 7(6): 757–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
30Kennedy, ET, Ohls, J, Carlson, S, Fleming, K. The Healthy Eating Index: design and applications. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 1995; 95(10): 1103–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
31Haines, PS, Siega-Riz, AM, Popkin, BM. The Diet Quality Index revised: a measurement instrument for populations. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 1999; 99(6): 697–704.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed