Skip to main content

The test-retest reliability and validity of food photography and food diary analyses.

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, 81 (5), 563-572.

Full text available as:

[img] PDF
ND_FP_FD_ReliabilityValidity_ACCEPTED_20082024.pdf - Accepted Version
Restricted to Repository staff only until 24 September 2025.
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial.

403kB

DOI: 10.1111/1747-0080.12901

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
Uncontrolled Keywords:energy expenditure; energy intake; nutrition; portion size; technology
Group:Faculty of Health & Social Sciences
ID Code:40228
Deposited By: Symplectic RT2
Deposited On:08 Aug 2024 12:07
Last Modified:26 Nov 2024 16:08

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

More statistics for this item...
Repository Staff Only -