Question 3
The authors mention a set-back of the 24-hour dietary recall is that participants can under-report intake. In this study, dietary data was collected by trained and certified interviewers through a four step process. Do you feel this approach helped improve the accuracy of the results for this study? Would this process be useful in all studies utilizing the 24-hour dietary recall collection method?
posted by Brooke S @ 2:43 PM
16 comments
16 Comments:
I do not doubt that this process improved accuracy but it would be interesting to compare this process to a 24-hour dietary recall in the same study. It may provide more accurate information but it would also be more costly and time consuming so it would be good to know the benefits vs cost for something like this before using it in all studies.
I think this 4 step approach would definetly improve accuracy of the study. It would make participants rethink their answers to questions as they are questioned again to make sure things are correct. I am sure many people would then say "Oh yea...I had this too!". This process is definetly useful with 24 hour recall methods, but requires a lot of time and trained people on one on one interviews which makes this very difficult and time consuming.
I do think the interview process improved the accuracy of this study slightly. People can still under or over report consumption during an interview process. I don't think this process would be feasible for all studies using a 24 hour recall to do an interview. It would most likely be too costly and time consuming to have trained interviewers see all participants.
I agree with Stephanie that the two data collection methods should be compared to know which one is more accurate. I'm assuming that the interviews would be accurate yet some people may be intimidated by the interview process and under or over report what they consumed.
I do believe this approach would be beneficial to the 24 recall reliance and would be useful in all studies using this method. However, since 24 hour recall is often seen as a 'negative' in a study, or a weaker form of data gathering I think it would be more beneficial to apply a different data collection method all together.
I agree with Michela that having someone there to clarify their answers would be beneficial and may uncover some intakes that were overlooked. However, as she mentions, the time necessary to do this would often become an issue.
Looking back on the steps taken, it looks like it was much more in-depth than typical 24 hour diet recalls. Since the trained interviewers double-checked for accuracy and portion sizes, I feel the results should be more accurate. It definitely was more labor-intensive and time-consuming, so I am unsure if it would be appropriate for studies on a large scale. It also appears everyone else has the same thoughts about the process too!
I think to some point it did help record a more accurate intake. However, even with the most prying and continuous questioning, people might not remember something that they ate. I think it was a good idea and should be used in other studies to decrease error as much as possible, but there will still be some error.
Steph-
I like your idea about looking at the benefits vs cost of a 24 hr recall and interviewing. I would like to see a study simply comparing the results!
Amanda-
I agree with your comment about this method possibly being too time consuming to do in large scale studies. It would be so hard to individually talk to each participant and definelty cost more money.
When I was in college I was trained to do 24-hour recall - and being trained and following the 4 steps definitely helps, but I still suspect that people under-reported. For example, I remember from the research we did, one man reported only drinking coke for a 24-hour period, and someone else had only had 1 or 2 small meals of potatoes and few other foods. Given that these people were middle-aged and had diabetes, I really doubt the accuracy of those surveys.
That is interesting Meg, and I can see where even the 4 step there would be some inaccurate reporting. I think this is something that will always be an issue in diet recall/research
Trained and certified interviews are nice to have when using any type of food record, if adequate education on the food record process and serving sizes are not provided. However, since this study was over a long period of time a 24 hour recall is not the ideal instrument to assess dietary trends. A Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ) would tell the researchers how often foods containing Vitamin D were consumed and would help to paint a bigger, dietary picture of each participant’s consumption.
It may not be useful in all studies that use 24 hour recalls but I'd think that checking and rechecking the data would be a good habit to get into anyway. However, just how different is this 4 step process? Is there really much of a time or cost difference? Stephanie's idea about comparing different 24 hour recall methods is excellent. I'd want to know more about benefits vs cost if I were a researcher.
I think that this may have helped increase accuracy because it allows them to coach participants through the previous days and remember some meals they may have forgotten. I do not think this would work for all studies using a 24- hour recall. Some studies have too large of numbers or do not have the funding for this to be possible. It may be ideal but not feasible.
I think Kevin's right - the food frequency questionnaire would definitely be the best survey for this type of research. I wonder if there is a study out there similar to the Minnesota Heart Study, only done with a better diet survey tool (ffq for example.) These researchers could have used it instead.
Post a Comment
<< Home