Cognitive research enhances accuracy of food frequency questionnaire reports: results of an experimental validation study

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-8223(02)90050-7Get rights and content

Abstract

Objective To test whether changing a food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) on the basis of cognitive theory and testing results in greater accuracy. Accuracy was examined for 4 design issues: a) Grouping: asking about foods in a single vs multiple separate questions; b) different forms of a food: asking consumption frequency of each form of a food (eg, skim, 2%, whole milk) vs a nesting approach—asking frequency of the main food (eg, milk) and proportion of times each form was consumed; c) additions (eg, sugar to coffee): asking independent of the main food vs nested under the main foods; d) units: asking frequency and portion size vs frequency of units (eg, cups of coffee).

Design Participants in two randomly assigned groups completed 30 consecutive daily food reports (DFRs), followed by 1 of 2 FFQs that asked about foods consumed in the past month. One was a new, cognitively-based National Cancer Institute (NCI) Diet History Questionnaire; the other was the 1992 NCI-Block Health Habits and History Questionnaire.

Subjects/setting 623 participants, age range 25 to 70 years, from metropolitan Washington, DC.

Statistical analyses performed Accuracy was assessed by comparing DFR and FFQ responses using categorical (percent agreement) and continuous (rank order correlation, discrepancy scores) agreement statistics.

Results Grouping: accuracy was greater using separate questions. Different forms of food: accuracy was greater using nesting. Additions: neither approach was consistently superior; accuracy of the addition report was affected by accuracy of the main food report. Units: both approaches were similarly accurate.

Conclusions Accuracy of FFQ reporting can be improved by restructuring questions based on cognitive theory and testing. J Am Diet Assoc. 2002;102:212–218,223–225,

Section snippets

Experimental Design

After stratified random assignment into 2 groups, study participants completed 30 days of criterion information, and then completed their respective FFQs (either the HHHQ or the test-DHQ) for the reference period of the previous month. Table 1 shows the items used to evaluate each question-design issue. Additional items were queried similarly on both FFQs (control items).

Instruments

The Daily Food Report (DFR), is a 1-page (2-sided) machine-scannable list of 88 food and drink items. Each participant filled in bubbles next to each item to indicate how many times the item was consumed that day. Items were placed on the DFR: a) if they were relevant to the 4 question-design issues under study; and b) if, based on other food intake data (USDA's Continuing Survey of Food Intakes of Individuals 1994–1996), it was expected that they would be consumed frequently enough within 30

Sample and Study Procedures

Reliably prompt mail was required to monitor daily completion of DFRs, so participants were sampled from a restricted geographical area. The sampling frame consisted of households with addresses listed in residential telephone directories in Washington, DC; Alexandria, Arlington, and Fairfax counties, Virginia; and Montgomery, Prince George's, and Frederick counties (excluding Frederick City), Md.

In August 1996 postcards were sent that provided brief information about the study and indicated

Analytical Procedures

On the DFRs, participants reported the number of times each item was consumed each day. On the FFQs, participants reported a rate of intake (ie, number of times per time period). Thus, the DFR information was continuous, whereas the FFQ information was categorical. To compare the two types of information required constructing new variables: category-converted DFR variables and continuous-converted FFQ variables.

Variables: DFR For each food, daily reported frequencies of intake on the DFR were

Statistical Analyses

With the categorical variables, three statistics were calculated to assess the accuracy of FFQ responses: the percentage of individuals whose FFQ responses agreed exactly with their category-converted DFR information, the percentage of those who never recorded consuming an item (on the DFR) and who reported never eating that item (on the FFQ), and the percentage of those who ever recorded consuming the food (on the DFR) and who reported consuming the food (on the FFQ). The continuity-adjusted χ2

Results

Of the 650 participants enrolled in the study, 623 (95.8%) returned at least 26 DFRs and the FFQ. Of these, 64% were female; 76% were white, 14% African-American, 4% Latino, and 6% other or unknown; 31% were ages 25 to 39 years, 43% ages 40 to 54, and 26% ages 55 to 70; 1% had less than high school education, 12% had no higher than high school education, and 86% had more than high school education; and 13% resided in Washington, DC, 31% in Virginia, 10% in rural Frederick, Md, and 44% in other

Comparability of HHHQ and Test-DHQ Samples

To examine comparability between participants completing the HHHQ and the test-DHQ, the demographic characteristics, FFQ completion rate, dietary intake recorded on the DFR instrument, and accuracy of FFQ reports for similarly worded foods were compared.

The HHHQ and test-DHQ groups were not significantly different in gender, age, race/ethnicity, educational level, or residence. Of the 623 participants in the study, 314 completed the HHHQ and 309 the test-DHQ, indicating that the greater length

Food Grouping: Single vs Separate Questions

Response accuracy of frequency reports for foods (Table 1) asked about in a single question vs asked about in separate questions were compared. In most but not all comparisons, the test-DHQ separated food question approach was superior to the HHHQ grouped food single question approach (Table 2).

Although there were no statistically significant differences between the two approaches in agreement for those respondents who did not consume the item, agreement for those who did consume the item was

Different Forms of Foods: Multiple Separate Questions vs Nesting

The HHHQ asks separate questions about frequency of consumption and portion size for different forms of certain foods. The test-DHQ uses a nesting approach in which questions about the frequency of consumption and portion size for the main food are asked, followed by questions about the relative proportions of time subordinate forms are consumed (Table 1).

In general, agreement statistics for the total samples indicate that frequency estimates for the main food were better with the nesting

Additions to Foods: Single Independent Question vs Nesting

The third design area examined—whether to ask about the use of an addition to food items in a single independent question (the HHHQ approach) or to nest questions about the use of the addition underneath each main food (the test-DHQ approach) (Table 1)—produced inconsistent results across the examined foods (Table 5). For milk on cereal, the test-DHQ nesting approach was somewhat better than the HHHQ single independent question approach. For salad dressing and mayonnaise, no differences between

Foods Conceptualized in Units: Frequency and Portion Size vs Frequency of Units

The last design issue examined was the utility of asking about foods in their usual serving units compared with asking about frequency and portion size (Table 1). Accuracy statistics for the two FFQs were generally similar (data not shown). Accuracy was relatively high for both instruments and for all items for nonconsumers and consumers. For example, for cups of coffee, correlations were 0.94 (HHHQ) and 0.92 (test-DHQ); percent agreement among nonconsumers was 95.3 (HHHQ) and 90.6 (test-DHQ);

Discussion

Many characteristics of FFQs likely affect reporting accuracy, including the number and nature of line items, wording, formatting, and response categories. The results of our study illustrate the complexity in the interplay of these characteristics.

The first question-design issue investigated in this study was the effect on accuracy of grouping several food items into a single question. In closed-ended dietary questionnaires like FFQs, it is impossible to ask about consumption of the entire

Applications/Conclusions

Cognitive research can reveal superior ways to ask about particular foods on an FFQ and other dietary assessment instruments. Dietitians should be aware of cognitive issues when selecting or modifying an FFQ for a particular target audience. The findings of this research were used to update and complete a version of the DHQ for public use (14).

References (15)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (232)

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text