CRITICAL-EVALUATION OF ENERGY-INTAKE DATA USING FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF ENERGY PHYSIOLOGY .2. EVALUATING THE RESULTS OF PUBLISHED SURVEYS

AE BLACK, GR GOLDBERG, SA JEBB, Barbara Livingstone, TJ COLE, AM PRENTICE

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

478 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The fundamental principles of energy physiology were used to evaluate the validity of reported energy intake (EI) in 37 published dietary studies of adults providing 68 subgroups when classified according to sex and dietary method. EI was expressed as a multiple of BMR estimated using the reported heights and weights of the study populations (EI:BMR(est)). This ratio was compared with a study-specific cut-off value representing the lowest value for EI:BMR(est) that could, within defined bounds of statistical probability, reflect the habitual energy expenditure of a sedentary life-style. Mean EI:BMR(est) was 1.43 (0.19) compared with an expected requirement of 1.55. In 46 out of the 68 groups (68%), EI:BMR(est) was below the study-specific cut-off value. EI:BMR(est) was 1.37 (SD = 0.13) for women and 1.50 (SD = 0.16) for men (P < 0.001). This could reflect either better reporting by men or a more active life-style. When categorized according to dietary assessment method, 64%, 88% and 25% of results fell below the acceptable cut-off value for studies by diet records, diet recall and diet history, respectively. These data indicate that dietary assessment methods have a strong bias towards underestimation of habitual energy intake.
LanguageEnglish
Pages583-599
JournalEuropean Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Volume45
Issue number12
Publication statusPublished - Dec 1991

Fingerprint

Energy Intake
Life Style
Diet
Diet Records
Surveys and Questionnaires
Energy Metabolism
Weights and Measures
Population

Cite this

@article{725e03b3844745eb921e7a59f87711c0,
title = "CRITICAL-EVALUATION OF ENERGY-INTAKE DATA USING FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF ENERGY PHYSIOLOGY .2. EVALUATING THE RESULTS OF PUBLISHED SURVEYS",
abstract = "The fundamental principles of energy physiology were used to evaluate the validity of reported energy intake (EI) in 37 published dietary studies of adults providing 68 subgroups when classified according to sex and dietary method. EI was expressed as a multiple of BMR estimated using the reported heights and weights of the study populations (EI:BMR(est)). This ratio was compared with a study-specific cut-off value representing the lowest value for EI:BMR(est) that could, within defined bounds of statistical probability, reflect the habitual energy expenditure of a sedentary life-style. Mean EI:BMR(est) was 1.43 (0.19) compared with an expected requirement of 1.55. In 46 out of the 68 groups (68{\%}), EI:BMR(est) was below the study-specific cut-off value. EI:BMR(est) was 1.37 (SD = 0.13) for women and 1.50 (SD = 0.16) for men (P < 0.001). This could reflect either better reporting by men or a more active life-style. When categorized according to dietary assessment method, 64{\%}, 88{\%} and 25{\%} of results fell below the acceptable cut-off value for studies by diet records, diet recall and diet history, respectively. These data indicate that dietary assessment methods have a strong bias towards underestimation of habitual energy intake.",
author = "AE BLACK and GR GOLDBERG and SA JEBB and Barbara Livingstone and TJ COLE and AM PRENTICE",
year = "1991",
month = "12",
language = "English",
volume = "45",
pages = "583--599",
journal = "European Journal of Clinical Nutrition",
issn = "0954-3007",
number = "12",

}

CRITICAL-EVALUATION OF ENERGY-INTAKE DATA USING FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF ENERGY PHYSIOLOGY .2. EVALUATING THE RESULTS OF PUBLISHED SURVEYS. / BLACK, AE; GOLDBERG, GR; JEBB, SA; Livingstone, Barbara; COLE, TJ; PRENTICE, AM.

In: European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 45, No. 12, 12.1991, p. 583-599.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - CRITICAL-EVALUATION OF ENERGY-INTAKE DATA USING FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF ENERGY PHYSIOLOGY .2. EVALUATING THE RESULTS OF PUBLISHED SURVEYS

AU - BLACK, AE

AU - GOLDBERG, GR

AU - JEBB, SA

AU - Livingstone, Barbara

AU - COLE, TJ

AU - PRENTICE, AM

PY - 1991/12

Y1 - 1991/12

N2 - The fundamental principles of energy physiology were used to evaluate the validity of reported energy intake (EI) in 37 published dietary studies of adults providing 68 subgroups when classified according to sex and dietary method. EI was expressed as a multiple of BMR estimated using the reported heights and weights of the study populations (EI:BMR(est)). This ratio was compared with a study-specific cut-off value representing the lowest value for EI:BMR(est) that could, within defined bounds of statistical probability, reflect the habitual energy expenditure of a sedentary life-style. Mean EI:BMR(est) was 1.43 (0.19) compared with an expected requirement of 1.55. In 46 out of the 68 groups (68%), EI:BMR(est) was below the study-specific cut-off value. EI:BMR(est) was 1.37 (SD = 0.13) for women and 1.50 (SD = 0.16) for men (P < 0.001). This could reflect either better reporting by men or a more active life-style. When categorized according to dietary assessment method, 64%, 88% and 25% of results fell below the acceptable cut-off value for studies by diet records, diet recall and diet history, respectively. These data indicate that dietary assessment methods have a strong bias towards underestimation of habitual energy intake.

AB - The fundamental principles of energy physiology were used to evaluate the validity of reported energy intake (EI) in 37 published dietary studies of adults providing 68 subgroups when classified according to sex and dietary method. EI was expressed as a multiple of BMR estimated using the reported heights and weights of the study populations (EI:BMR(est)). This ratio was compared with a study-specific cut-off value representing the lowest value for EI:BMR(est) that could, within defined bounds of statistical probability, reflect the habitual energy expenditure of a sedentary life-style. Mean EI:BMR(est) was 1.43 (0.19) compared with an expected requirement of 1.55. In 46 out of the 68 groups (68%), EI:BMR(est) was below the study-specific cut-off value. EI:BMR(est) was 1.37 (SD = 0.13) for women and 1.50 (SD = 0.16) for men (P < 0.001). This could reflect either better reporting by men or a more active life-style. When categorized according to dietary assessment method, 64%, 88% and 25% of results fell below the acceptable cut-off value for studies by diet records, diet recall and diet history, respectively. These data indicate that dietary assessment methods have a strong bias towards underestimation of habitual energy intake.

M3 - Article

VL - 45

SP - 583

EP - 599

JO - European Journal of Clinical Nutrition

T2 - European Journal of Clinical Nutrition

JF - European Journal of Clinical Nutrition

SN - 0954-3007

IS - 12

ER -