Reproducibility and comparison of a digital food frequency questionnaire (DIGIKOST-FFQ) assessing adherence to national diet and lifestyle recommendations

Markus Dines Knudsen; Monica Hauger  Carlsen; Anette  Hjartåker; Rune  Blomhoff; Hege Berg  Henriksen

doi:10.29219/fnr.v68.10366

Markus Dines Knudsen Department of Nutrition, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Oslo
Monica Hauger Carlsen Department of Nutrition, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Oslo
Anette Hjartåker Department of Nutrition, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Oslo
Rune Blomhoff Department of Nutrition, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Oslo
Hege Berg Henriksen Department of Nutrition, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Oslo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.29219/fnr.v68.10366

Keywords: digital food frequency questionnaire, lifestyle assessment tool, reproducibility, comparison, Norwegian food-based dietary guidelines

Abstract

Background: We have developed a digital semi-quantitative food frequency and lifestyle questionnaire, the DIGIKOST-FFQ, based on the validated paper-based NORDIET-FFQ.

Objective: The study aims to investigate the reproducibility of the DIGIKOST-FFQ and to compare the DIGIKOST-FFQ against the NORDIET-FFQ for the adjusted questions for intakes of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, fish, meat, and dairy products.

Design: Participants were recruited from May to September 2021 through a random sample from the National Population Register and advertisements on Facebook in Norway. In the reproducibility study, the DIGIKOST-FFQ was completed twice by the participants, 1–2 months apart. In the comparison study, the DIGIKOST-FFQ was completed 1–2 months prior to the NORDIET-FFQ.

Results: In the reproducibility study, 317 individuals were included. For 12 out of 16 food groups there were no significant differences in intake estimations between the first and second DIGIKOST-FFQ administrations. A small but significant median difference was observed for fruits (6 g/day) and vegetables (24 g/day). Correlations were satisfactory for all items (r = 0.60–1.00), and in the cross-classification 85% of the participants were classified into the same or adjacent quartile for all items. The comparison study included 81 individuals. Compared to the NORDIET-FFQ a significant median difference was observed for fruits 29 g/day, vegetables 36 g/day, whole grains –10 g/day, and red meat –11 g/day, but not for fish, processed meat, or dairy products.

Conclusion: The DIGIKOST-FFQ was able to reproduce diet and lifestyle at the group level. An intended difference for the food groups where questions had been adjusted, was observed between DIGIKOST-FFQ and NORDIET-FFQ in the comparison study.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1.
Cade JE. Measuring diet in the 21st century: use of new technologies. Proc Nutr Soc 2017; 76(3): 276–82. doi: 10.1017/S0029665116002883

2.
Rusin M, Arsand E, Hartvigsen G. Functionalities and input methods for recording food intake: a systematic review. Int J Med Inform 2013; 82(8): 653–64. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2013.01.007

3.
Amoutzopoulos B, Steer T, Roberts C, Cade JE, Boushey CJ, Collins CE, et al. Traditional methods v. new technologies – dilemmas for dietary assessment in large-scale nutrition surveys and studies: a report following an international panel discussion at the 9th International Conference on Diet and Activity Methods (ICDAM9), Brisbane, 3 September 2015. J Nutr Sci 2018; 7: e11. doi: 10.1017/jns.2018.4

4.
Henriksen HB, Knudsen MD, Carlsen MH, Hjartaker A, Blomhoff R. A Short Digital Food Frequency Questionnaire (DIGIKOST-FFQ) assessing dietary intake and other lifestyle factors among Norwegians: Qualitative evaluation with focus group interviews and usability testing. JMIR Form Res 2022; 6(11): e35933. doi: 10.2196/35933

5.
The Norwegian Directory of Health. Kostråd for å Fremme Folkehelsen og Forebygge Kroniske Sykdommer Metodologi og Vitenskapelig Kunnskapsgrunnlag: Nasjonalt Råd for Ernæring 2011. Oslo: Helsedirektoratet; 2011.

6.
Henriksen HB, Knudsen MD, Hjartåker A, Blomhoff R, Carlsen MH. Digital Food Frequency Questionnaire Assessing Adherence to the Norwegian Food-Based Dietary Guidelines and Other National Lifestyle Recommendations: Instrument Validation Study. J Med Internet Res. 2024 Apr 30;26:e53442. doi: 10.2196/53442. PMID: 38687986; PMCID: PMC11094607.

7.
Henriksen HB, Carlsen MH, Paur I, Berntsen S, Bohn SK, Skjetne AJ, et al. Relative validity of a short food frequency questionnaire assessing adherence to the Norwegian dietary guidelines among colorectal cancer patients. Food Nutr Res 2018; 62: 1306. doi: 10.29219/fnr.v62.1306

8.
Willett W, Lwnart E. Reproducibility and validity of food frequency questionnaires. In: Willett W, ed. Nutritional epidemiology. 3rd ed. Oxford Scholarship; New York: Oxford University Press; 2013, p. 96.

9.
Willett W. Correction for the effects of measurement error. In: Willett W, ed. Nutritional epidemiology. 3r ed. Oxford Scholarship 2013, New York: Oxford University Press; p. 287.

10.
Henriksen HB, Raeder H, Bohn SK, Paur I, Kvaerner AS, Billington SA, et al. The Norwegian dietary guidelines and colorectal cancer survival (CRC-NORDIET) study: a food-based multicentre randomized controlled trial. BMC Cancer 2017; 17(1): 83. doi: 10.1186/s12885-017-3072-4

11.
Horn J, Kolberg M, Rangul V, Magnussen EB, Asvold BO, Henriksen HB, et al. Feasibility of a postpartum web- and phone-based lifestyle program for women with a history of preeclampsia or gestational diabetes: a pilot intervention study. Womens Health Rep (New Rochelle) 2023; 4(1): 345–57. doi: 10.1089/whr.2023.0039

12.
Svendsen K, Henriksen HB, Ostengen B, Jacobs DR, Jr., Telle-Hansen VH, Carlsen MH, et al. Evaluation of a short Food Frequency Questionnaire to assess cardiovascular disease-related diet and lifestyle factors. Food Nutr Res 2018; 62: 1370. doi: 10.29219/fnr.v62.1370

13.
Svendsen K, Telle-Hansen VH, Morch-Reiersen LT, Garstad KW, Thyholt K, Granlund L, et al. A randomized controlled trial in Norwegian pharmacies on effects of risk alert and advice in people with elevated cardiovascular risk. Prev Med Rep 2018; 12: 79–86. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2018.08.004

14.
Henriksen HB, Berntsen S, Paur I, Zucknick M, Skjetne AJ, Bohn SK, et al. Validation of two short questionnaires assessing physical activity in colorectal cancer patients. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil 2018; 10: 8. doi: 10.1186/s13102-018-0096-2

15.
Cade JE, Burley VJ, Warm DL, Thompson RL, Margetts BM. Food-frequency questionnaires: a review of their design, validation and utilisation. Nutr Res Rev 2004; 17(1): 5–22. doi: 10.1079/NRR200370

16.
Margetts BM, Nelson M. Design concepts in nutritional epidemiology. New York: Oxford University Press; 1997.

17.
Hankin JH, Wilkens LR, Kolonel LN, Yoshizawa CN. Validation of a quantitative diet history method in Hawaii. Am J Epidemiol 1991; 133(6): 616–28. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115934

18.
Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1(8476): 307–10. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8

19.
Schmidt ME, Steindorf K. Statistical methods for the validation of questionnaires – discrepancy between theory and practice. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45(4): 409–13. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1634096

20.
Carlsen MH, Andersen LF, Hjartaker A. Reproducibility and feasibility of an online self-administered food frequency questionnaire for use among adult Norwegians. Food Nutr Res 2021; 65: 7561. doi: 10.29219/fnr.v65.7561

21.
Galea S, Tracy M. Participation rates in epidemiologic studies. Ann Epidemiol 2007; 17(9): 643–53. doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2007.03.013

22.
Halbesleben JR, Whitman MV. Evaluating survey quality in health services research: a decision framework for assessing nonresponse bias. Health Serv Res 2013; 48(3): 913–30. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12002

23.
Keeble C, Baxter PD, Barber S, Law GR. Participation rates in epidemiology studies and surveys: a review 2007–2015. Internet J Epidemiol 2016; 14: 1–14.

24.
Norway S. Educational attainment of the population 2022. Available from: https://www.ssb.no/en/utdanning/utdanningsniva/statistikk/befolkningens-utdanningsniva [Cited: 24 August 2022]

25.
Cade J, Thompson R, Burley V, Warm D. Development, validation and utilisation of food-frequency questionnaires – a review. Public Health Nutr 2002; 5(4): 567–87. doi: 10.1079/PHN2001318

Reproducibility and comparison of a digital food frequency questionnaire (DIGIKOST-FFQ) assessing adherence to national diet and lifestyle recommendations

Abstract

Downloads

References

Most read articles by the same author(s)