Minimum Days Estimation for Reliable Dietary Intake Information: Findings from a Digital Cohort

Rohan Singh, Mathieu Théo Eric Verest, Marcel Salathé
{"title":"Minimum Days Estimation for Reliable Dietary Intake Information: Findings from a Digital Cohort","authors":"Rohan Singh, Mathieu Théo Eric Verest, Marcel Salathé","doi":"10.1101/2024.08.29.24312779","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Accurate dietary assessment is crucial for understanding diet-health relationships, but variability in daily food intake poses challenges in capturing precise data. This study leveraged data from 958 participants of the “Food & You“ digital cohort to determine the minimum number of days required for reliable dietary intake estimation. Participants tracked meals using the AI-assisted MyFoodRepo app, providing a comprehensive dataset of over 315,000 dishes across 23,335 participant days. We employed multiple analytical approaches, including Linear Mixed Models (LMM), Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), and Coefficient of Variation (CV) methods. LMM analysis revealed significant day-of-week effects, with increased energy, carbohydrate, and alcohol intake on weekends, particularly pronounced in younger individuals and those with higher BMI. ICC and CV analyses demonstrated that the required number of days varies considerably among nutrients and food groups. Water, coffee, and total food quantity by weight could be reliably estimated (ICC>0.9) with just 1-2 days of data. Most macronutrients, including carbohydrates, protein, and fat, achieved good reliability (ICC>0.75 or r=0.8) with 3-4 days of data. Micronutrients and some food groups like meat and vegetables typically required 4-5 days for highly reliable estimation. Optimal day combinations often included both weekdays and weekend days. Our findings largely align with and refine FAO recommendations, suggesting that 3-4 days, typically non-consecutive and including a weekend day, are generally sufficient for reliable estimation of energy and macronutrient intake. However, our results provide more nuanced, nutrient-specific guidelines that can inform the design of future nutritional studies.","PeriodicalId":501073,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Nutrition","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.29.24312779","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Accurate dietary assessment is crucial for understanding diet-health relationships, but variability in daily food intake poses challenges in capturing precise data. This study leveraged data from 958 participants of the “Food & You“ digital cohort to determine the minimum number of days required for reliable dietary intake estimation. Participants tracked meals using the AI-assisted MyFoodRepo app, providing a comprehensive dataset of over 315,000 dishes across 23,335 participant days. We employed multiple analytical approaches, including Linear Mixed Models (LMM), Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), and Coefficient of Variation (CV) methods. LMM analysis revealed significant day-of-week effects, with increased energy, carbohydrate, and alcohol intake on weekends, particularly pronounced in younger individuals and those with higher BMI. ICC and CV analyses demonstrated that the required number of days varies considerably among nutrients and food groups. Water, coffee, and total food quantity by weight could be reliably estimated (ICC>0.9) with just 1-2 days of data. Most macronutrients, including carbohydrates, protein, and fat, achieved good reliability (ICC>0.75 or r=0.8) with 3-4 days of data. Micronutrients and some food groups like meat and vegetables typically required 4-5 days for highly reliable estimation. Optimal day combinations often included both weekdays and weekend days. Our findings largely align with and refine FAO recommendations, suggesting that 3-4 days, typically non-consecutive and including a weekend day, are generally sufficient for reliable estimation of energy and macronutrient intake. However, our results provide more nuanced, nutrient-specific guidelines that can inform the design of future nutritional studies.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
可靠膳食摄入量信息的最低天数估计:数字队列研究结果
准确的膳食评估对了解膳食与健康的关系至关重要,但每日食物摄入量的变化给获取精确数据带来了挑战。本研究利用 "Food & You "数字队列中 958 名参与者的数据来确定可靠的膳食摄入量估计所需的最低天数。参与者使用人工智能辅助的 "MyFoodRepo "应用程序追踪膳食,提供了一个包含 23335 个参与者日的 315000 多道菜肴的综合数据集。我们采用了多种分析方法,包括线性混合模型 (LMM)、类内相关系数 (ICC) 和变异系数 (CV) 方法。线性混合模型分析表明,周日效应明显,周末能量、碳水化合物和酒精摄入量增加,这在年轻人和体重指数(BMI)较高的人群中尤为明显。ICC 和 CV 分析表明,不同营养素和食物组所需的天数差别很大。只需 1-2 天的数据,就能可靠地估算出水、咖啡和按体重计算的食物总量(ICC>0.9)。大多数宏量营养素,包括碳水化合物、蛋白质和脂肪,只需 3-4 天的数据就能达到良好的可靠性(ICC>0.75 或 r=0.8)。微量营养素和一些食物组(如肉类和蔬菜)通常需要 4-5 天的数据才能进行高度可靠的估算。最佳日期组合通常包括工作日和周末。我们的研究结果在很大程度上与粮农组织的建议一致,并对其进行了改进,表明 3-4 天(通常是非连续的,包括周末一天)通常足以可靠地估算能量和宏量营养素的摄入量。不过,我们的研究结果提供了更细致的、针对具体营养素的指导原则,可为未来营养研究的设计提供参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Randomized dose–response trial of n–3 fatty acids in hormone receptor negative breast cancer survivors—impact on breast adipose oxylipin and DNA methylation patterns Advertising ultra-processed foods around urban and rural schools in Kenya Estimated morbimortality and costs attributable to child and adolescent obesity in Brazil from 2024 to 2060: a multistate life table study Integrating co-design into formative research for a SBCC entry-point platform for nutrition-sensitive social protection programs in low -and middle-income country settings. A Qualitative Study on Food Taboos Among Rural Pregnant Women in Bangladesh: Motivators for Adherence and Influencers of Taboo-Breaking Behavior
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1