Curtis, C., Hills, S. P., Arjomandkhah, N., Cooke, C., Ranchordas, M. K. and Russell, M., 2024. The test-retest reliability and validity of food photography and food diary analyses. Nutrition and Dietetics. (In Press)
Full text available as:
![]() |
PDF
ND_FP_FD_ReliabilityValidity_ACCEPTED_08082024.pdf - Accepted Version Restricted to Repository staff only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial. 374kB |
Copyright to original material in this document is with the original owner(s). Access to this content through BURO is granted on condition that you use it only for research, scholarly or other non-commercial purposes. If you wish to use it for any other purposes, you must contact BU via BURO@bournemouth.ac.uk. Any third party copyright material in this document remains the property of its respective owner(s). BU grants no licence for further use of that third party material. |
Abstract
Aims: To assess test-retest reliability of both food photography and food diary methods and validity of these data against known values derived from food labels. Methods: Test-retest reliability analyses of food diary and food photography were compared using single foodstuffs using intra-class correlation coefficients, coefficients of variation and limits of agreement. For food diaries, 24-h test-retest reliability was also examined. Validity was assessed against weighed analyses. As part of habitual intake, a single foodstuff (randomly allocated from 14 common foods) were consumed by 26 participants over 24-h. On two occasions (14 days apart), single-blind dietary analyses allowed estimation of foodstuff-specific energy and macronutrient content, and 24-h intakes. Results: For food diaries, test-retest reliability was acceptable (weight, energy, carbohydrate, protein, fat: all intraclass correlation coefficients >0.990, coefficient of variation percentage: <0.1%, limits of agreements: <0.1 to <0.1, p>0.05, effect size: <0.01). For food photography, test-retest reliability was acceptable for weight, energy, carbohydrate, and protein (all intraclass correlation coefficients >0.898, coefficient of variation percentage: 3.6% - 6.2%, limits of agreements: 1.1 to – 44.9, effect size: 0.01 – 0.12). Food photography validity was worse than food diaries for all variables (percentage difference: 8.8% - 15.3%, coefficient of variation percentage: 7.5% - 13.8%, all; p≤0.05, effect size: 0.001 – 0.11). Conclusions: Greater reliability and validity occurred in food diaries versus food photography; findings which may suggest that using food photography may lead to an under-estimation of energy and macronutrient content, which may have implications for dietary interventions and nutritional strategies.
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1032-1322 |
Group: | Faculty of Health & Social Sciences |
ID Code: | 40228 |
Deposited By: | Symplectic RT2 |
Deposited On: | 08 Aug 2024 12:07 |
Last Modified: | 08 Aug 2024 12:07 |
Downloads
Downloads per month over past year
Repository Staff Only - |