Validation of a self-administered FFQ in adults in Argentina, Chile and Uruguay. Issue 1 (14th January 2014)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Elorriaga, Natalia; Irazola, Vilma E; Defagó, María D; Britz, Mónica; Martínez-Oakley, Solange P; Witriw, Alicia M; Rubinstein, Adolfo L
• Is Part Of: Public health nutrition. Volume 18:Issue 1(2015)
• Page Start: 59
• Page End: 67
• Publication Date: 2014-01-14
• Subjects: FFQ, -- Validity, -- Reproducibility, -- Southern Cone of Latin America; Nutrition -- Periodicals; Nutrition policy -- Periodicals; Public health -- Periodicals; 613.2
• DOI: 10.1017/S1368980013003431
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1368-9800

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: To assess the reproducibility and validity among adults in the Southern Cone of Latin America (Argentina, Chile and Uruguay) of a self-administered FFQ to be used in the CESCAS I Study, an ongoing observational prospective cohort study to detect and follow up CVD and their risk factors, as well as in other epidemiological studies. Design: Relative validity of the FFQ was evaluated by comparing nutrient and selected food group intakes with those from three 24 h recalls (24HR) administered over 6 months. The FFQ was administered at baseline (FFQ1) and again after 3 months (FFQ2). Setting: Primary-care centres in Argentina, Chile and Uruguay. Subjects: Adults ( n 147) aged 21–74 years. Results: Reproducibility (FFQ1 v . FFQ2): the intra-class correlation coefficients for nutrients ranged from 0·52 (potassium) to 0·74 (fat). Validity (FFQ1 v . the average of three 24HR): the Pearson correlations for energy-adjusted nutrients ranged from 0·39 (thiamin and cholesterol) to 0·59 (carbohydrate). Joint classification: overall, 66 % of participants in the lowest 24HR quintile were in the lowest one or two FFQ1 quintiles, and 62 % of those in the highest 24HR quintile were in the highest one or two FFQ1 quintiles. On average, only 4 % were misclassified into extreme quintiles. Conclusions: The FFQ version for the Southern Cone seems to present moderate to acceptable relative validity and reliability for its use in the CESCAS I Study to measure dietary exposure.