View graph of relations

Objective: The objective of the present study was to evaluate energy intake (EI) estimated from two nonconsecutive 24-hour recalls (24-HDRs) and a pre-coded seven-day food record (7-dFR) against objective measurements of energy expenditure (EE) in children.
Design: A total of 67 78 year-olds and 64 1213 year-olds completed the 224-HDRs, the 7-dFR, and wore ActiReg † (PreMed AS, Oslo, Norway), a combined position and motion recording instrument, during the same seven days as the 7-dFR was filled in.
Results: In the 78 year-olds, EI from the 224-HDRs (EI224-HDR) was overestimated with 3% compared to EE (not significantly different), while EI from the 7-dFR (EI7-dFR) was underestimated with 7% compared to EE (P0.001). In the 1213 year-olds, the corresponding figures was underestimation by 10% with the 224-HDRs (PB0.001) and by 20% with the 7-dFR (PB0.001). For both age groups combined, the 95% limits of agreement were 438 and 3.52 MJ/d for the 224-HDRs, and 5.90 and 2.94 MJ/d for the 7-dFR. Pearson correlation coefficients between EI and EE were 0.51 for EI224-HDR and 0.29 for EI7-dFR, respectively. The proportion classified in the same or adjacent quartiles was 76% for EI224-HDR and 73% for EI7-dFR in the 78 year-olds, and 83% for EI224-HDR and 70% for EI7-dFR in the 1213 year-olds.
Conclusion: Misreporting of EI seemed modest with both the 224-HDRs and the 7-dFR in the 78 year-olds when compared to EE measured with ActiReg †. Under-reporting appeared to be more evident in the 1213 year-olds, especially with the 7-dFR. Compared to measurements of EE, the 224-HDRs seemed to perform slightly better than the 7-dFR in terms of ranking of individuals according to EI.
Original languageEnglish
JournalFood & Nutrition Research
Pages (from-to)1-10
StatePublished - 15 Feb 2012
CitationsWeb of Science® Times Cited: 5


  • dietary assessment, EFCOVAL, ActiReg
Download as:
Download as PDF
Select render style:
Download as HTML
Select render style:
Download as Word
Select render style:

ID: 7606027