54
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Update on NHANES Dietary Data: Focus on Collection, Release, Analytical Considerations, and Uses to Inform Public Policy 1 2

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          NHANES is the cornerstone for national nutrition monitoring to inform nutrition and health policy. Nutritional assessment in NHANES is described with a focus on dietary data collection, analysis, and uses in nutrition monitoring. NHANES has been collecting thorough data on diet, nutritional status, and chronic disease in cross-sectional surveys with nationally representative samples since the early 1970s. Continuous data collection began in 1999 with public data release in 2-y cycles on ∼10,000 participants. In 2002, the Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals and the NHANES dietary component were merged, forming a consolidated dietary data collection known as What We Eat in America; since then, 24-h recalls have been collected on 2 d using the USDA’s Automated Multiple-Pass Method. Detailed and targeted food-frequency questionnaires have been collected in some NHANES cycles. Dietary supplement use data have been collected (in detail since 2007) so that total nutrient intakes can be described for the population. The continuous NHANES can adapt its content to address emerging public health needs and reflect federal priorities. Changes in data collection methods are made after expert input and validation/crossover studies. NHANES dietary data are used to describe intake of foods, nutrients, food groups, and dietary patterns by the US population and large sociodemographic groups to plan and evaluate nutrition programs and policies. Usual dietary intake distributions can be estimated after adjusting for day-to-day variation. NHANES remains open and flexible to incorporate improvements while maintaining data quality and providing timely data to track the nation’s nutrition and health status. In summary, NHANES collects dietary data in the context of its broad, multipurpose goals; the strengths and limitations of these data are also discussed in this review.

          Related collections

          Most cited references29

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          National health and nutrition examination survey: analytic guidelines, 1999-2010.

          Background-Analytic guide lines were first created in 1996 to assist data users in analyzing data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III),conducted from 1988 to 1994 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics. NHANES became a continuous annual survey in 1999, with data released to the public in 2-year intervals. In 2002, 2004, and 2006, guidelines were created and posted on the NHANES website to assist analysts in understanding the key issues related to analyzing data from 1999 onward. This report builds on these previous guidelines and provides the first comprehensive summary of analytic guidelines for the 1999-2010 NHANES data. Objectives-This report provides general guidelines for researchers in analyzing 1999-2010 NHANES publicly released data. Information is presented on key issues related to NHANES data, including sample design, demographic variables, and combining survey cycles. Guidance is also provided on data analysis, including the use of appropriate survey weights, calculating variance estimations, determining the reliability of estimates, age adjustment, and computing population counts.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Using intake biomarkers to evaluate the extent of dietary misreporting in a large sample of adults: the OPEN study.

            This paper describes the Observing Protein and Energy Nutrition (OPEN) Study, conducted from September 1999 to March 2000. The purpose of the study was to assess dietary measurement error using two self-reported dietary instruments-the food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) and the 24-hour dietary recall (24HR)-and unbiased biomarkers of energy and protein intakes: doubly labeled water and urinary nitrogen. Participants were 484 men and women aged 40-69 years from Montgomery County, Maryland. Nine percent of men and 7% of women were defined as underreporters of both energy and protein intake on 24HRs; for FFQs, the comparable values were 35% for men and 23% for women. On average, men underreported energy intake compared with total energy expenditure by 12-14% on 24HRs and 31-36% on FFQs and underreported protein intake compared with a protein biomarker by 11-12% on 24HRs and 30-34% on FFQs. Women underreported energy intake on 24HRs by 16-20% and on FFQs by 34-38% and underreported protein intake by 11-15% on 24HRs and 27-32% on FFQs. There was little underreporting of the percentage of energy from protein for men or women. These findings have important implications for nutritional epidemiology and dietary surveillance.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Pooled results from 5 validation studies of dietary self-report instruments using recovery biomarkers for energy and protein intake.

              We pooled data from 5 large validation studies of dietary self-report instruments that used recovery biomarkers as references to clarify the measurement properties of food frequency questionnaires (FFQs) and 24-hour recalls. The studies were conducted in widely differing US adult populations from 1999 to 2009. We report on total energy, protein, and protein density intakes. Results were similar across sexes, but there was heterogeneity across studies. Using a FFQ, the average correlation coefficients for reported versus true intakes for energy, protein, and protein density were 0.21, 0.29, and 0.41, respectively. Using a single 24-hour recall, the coefficients were 0.26, 0.40, and 0.36, respectively, for the same nutrients and rose to 0.31, 0.49, and 0.46 when three 24-hour recalls were averaged. The average rate of under-reporting of energy intake was 28% with a FFQ and 15% with a single 24-hour recall, but the percentages were lower for protein. Personal characteristics related to under-reporting were body mass index, educational level, and age. Calibration equations for true intake that included personal characteristics provided improved prediction. This project establishes that FFQs have stronger correlations with truth for protein density than for absolute protein intake, that the use of multiple 24-hour recalls substantially increases the correlations when compared with a single 24-hour recall, and that body mass index strongly predicts under-reporting of energy and protein intakes.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Adv Nutr
                Adv Nutr
                advances in nutrition
                advannut
                Advances in Nutrition
                American Society for Nutrition
                2161-8313
                2156-5376
                7 January 2016
                January 2016
                1 January 2017
                : 7
                : 1
                : 121-134
                Affiliations
                [3 ]National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, National Center for Health Statistics, CDC, Hyattsville, MD;
                [4 ]Office of Dietary Supplements, NIH, Bethesda, MD; and
                [5 ]Food Surveys Research Group, USDA, Beltsville, MD
                Author notes
                [* ]To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: n.ahluwalia@ 123456cdc.gov .
                [1]

                The authors reported no funding received for this study. This is a free access article, distributed under terms ( http://www.nutrition.org/publications/guidelines-and-policies/license/) that permit unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                [2]

                Author disclosures: N Ahluwalia, J Dwyer, A Terry, A Moshfegh, C Johnson, no conflict of interest.

                Article
                009258
                10.3945/an.115.009258
                4717880
                26773020
                578b6c2d-f4ab-4c76-9b04-7cbae4807606
                © 2016 American Society for Nutrition

                This is a free access article, distributed under terms ( http://www.nutrition.org/publications/guidelines-and-policies/license/) that permit unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                Page count
                Pages: 14
                Categories
                Reviews

                dietary assessment,epidemiology,nutritional surveillance,public policy,nutrition databases,usual intake,nutrition policy

                Comments

                Comment on this article