The Accuracy of Portion Size Reporting on Self-Administered Online 24-Hour Dietary Recalls Among Women With Low Incomes.

BACKGROUND: Accurately estimating portion sizes remains a challenge in dietary assessment. Digital images used in online 24-hour dietary recalls may be conducive to accuracy. OBJECTIVE: The current analyses were conducted to examine the accuracy of portion size estimation by women with low incomes who completed 24-hour dietary recalls using the online Automated Self-Administered 24-hour Dietary Assessment Tool (ASA24) in the Food and Eating Assessment Study II. DESIGN: True dietary intake was observed for 3 meals on 1 day through a controlled feeding study conducted from May through July 2016. The following day, participants completed an unannounced 24-hour dietary recall using ASA24, independently or with assistance in a small-group setting. PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: Participants included 302 women aged 18 to 82 years living in the Washington, DC, area who met the income thresholds for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The accuracy of portion size estimation was assessed by comparing the weight truly consumed (observed) and the weight reported for predetermined categories of foods and beverages. STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED: The differences between observed and reported portions were examined and linear regression tested differences by recall condition. Analyses were conducted by condition and repeated with stratification by racial/ethnic identity, education, and body mass index. RESULTS: On average across foods and beverages, reported portion sizes were 7.4 g (95% CI, 4.3-10.5) and 6.4 g (95% CI, 2.8-10.0) higher than observed portion sizes in the independent and assisted conditions, respectively. Portion sizes were overestimated for small pieces and shaped foods in both conditions, as well as for amorphous/soft foods in the assisted condition and underestimated for single-unit foods in both conditions. Misestimation was fairly consistent by participants' race/ethnicity, education, and body mass index, to varying magnitudes. CONCLUSIONS: Women with low incomes overestimated the amounts of foods and beverages consumed across several categories using online 24-hour dietary recalls with digital images to support portion size estimation. Assistance with ASA24 had little impact on accuracy.

Healthy Eating Index-2015 Scores Among Adults Based on Observed vs Recalled Dietary Intake.

BACKGROUND: The construct and predictive validity of the Healthy Eating Index (HEI) have been demonstrated, but how error in reported dietary intake may affect scores is unclear. OBJECTIVE: These analyses examined concordance between HEI-2015 scores based on observed vs reported intake among adults. DESIGN: Data were from two feeding studies (Food and Eating Assessment STudy, or FEAST, I and II) in which true intake was observed for three meals on 1 day. The following day, participants completed an unannounced 24-hour dietary recall. PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: FEAST I (2012) included 81 men and women, aged 20 to 70 years, living in the Washington, DC, area. FEAST II (2016) included 302 women, aged 18 years or older, with low household incomes and living in the Washington, DC, area. In FEAST I, recalls were completed independently using the Automated Self-Administered 24-hour Dietary Assessment Tool (ASA24-2011) or interviewer-administered using the Automated Multiple-Pass Method. In FEAST II, recalls were completed using ASA24-2016, independently or in a small group setting with assistance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: HEI-2015 scores were calculated using the population ratio method. STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED: T-tests determined whether differences between scores based on observed and reported intake were different from zero. FEAST I data were stratified by sex, and in FEAST II, analyses were repeated by education and body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: Differences in total HEI-2015 scores between observed and reported intake ranged from -1.3 to 5.8 points among those completing ASA24 independently in both studies, compared with -2.5 points in the small group setting. For interviewer-administered recalls, the differences were -1.1 for men and 2.3 for women. In FEAST II, total HEI-2015 scores derived from observed intake were lower than scores derived from reported intake among those who had completed high school or less (-3.2, SE 1.1, P<0.01) and those with BMI ≥ 30 (-2.8, SE 1.1, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: HEI-2015 scores based on 24-hour dietary recall data are generally well estimated.

Performance and Feasibility of Recalls Completed Using the Automated Self-Administered 24-Hour Dietary Assessment Tool in Relation to Other Self-Report Tools and Biomarkers in the Interactive Diet and Activity Tracking in AARP (IDATA) Study.

BACKGROUND: Automated Self-Administered 24-Hour Dietary Assessment Tool (ASA24) is a self-administered web-based tool designed to collect detailed dietary data at low cost in observational studies. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to describe, overall and by demographic groups, the performance and feasibility of ASA24-2011 recalls and compare Healthy Eating Index-2015 (HEI-2015) total and component scores to 4-day food records (4DFRs) and food frequency questionnaires (FFQs). DESIGN: Over 12 months, participants completed up to 6 ASA24 recalls, 2 web-based FFQs, and 2 unweighed paper-and-pencil 4DFRs. Up to 3 attempts were made to obtain each ASA24 recall. Participants were administered doubly-labeled water to provide a measure of total energy expenditure and collected two 24-hour urine samples to assess concentrations of nitrogen, sodium, and potassium. PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: From January through September 2012, 1,110 adult members of AARP, 50 to 74 years of age, were recruited from the Pittsburgh, PA, area to participate in the Interactive Diet and Activity Tracking in AARP (IDATA) study. After excluding 33 participants who had not completed any dietary assessments, 531 men and 546 women remained. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Response rates, nutrient intakes compared to recovery biomarkers across each ASA24 administration day, and HEI-2015 total and component scores were measured. STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED: Means, medians, standard deviations, interquartile ranges, and HEI-2015 total and component scores computed using a multivariate measurement error model are presented. RESULTS: Ninety-one percent of men and 86% of women completed 3 ASA24 recalls. Approximately three-quarters completed 5 or more, higher than the completion rates for 2 4DFRs and 2 FFQs. Approximately, three-quarters of men and 70% of women completed ASA24 on the first attempt; 1 in 5 completed it on the second. Completion rates varied slightly by age and body mass index. Median time to complete ASA24-2011 (current version: ASA24-2020) declined with subsequent recalls from 55 to 41 minutes in men and from 58 to 42 minutes in women and was lowest in those younger than 60 years. Mean nutrient intakes were similar across recalls. For each recording day, energy intakes estimated by ASA24 were lower than energy expenditure. Reported intakes for protein, potassium, and sodium were closer to recovery biomarkers for women, but not for men. Geometric means of reported intakes of these nutrients did not systematically vary across ASA24 administrations, but differences between reported intakes and biomarkers differed by nutrient. Of 100 possible points, HEI-2015 total scores were nearly identical for 4DFRs and ASA24 recalls and higher for FFQs (men: 61, 60, and 68; women: 64, 64, and 72, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: ASA24, a freely available dietary assessment tool for use in large-scale nutrition research, was found to be highly feasible. Similar to previously reported data for nutrient intakes, HEI-2015 total and component scores for ASA24 recalls were comparable to those for 4DFRs, but not FFQs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03268577 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

The Provision of Assistance Does Not Substantially Impact the Accuracy of 24-Hour Dietary Recalls Completed Using the Automated Self-Administered 24-H Dietary Assessment Tool among Women with Low Incomes.

Background: Evidence is lacking informing the use of the Automated Self-Administered 24-h Dietary Assessment Tool (ASA24) with populations characterized by low income. Objective: This study was conducted among women with low incomes to evaluate the accuracy of ASA24 recalls completed independently and with assistance. Methods: Three hundred and two women, aged ≥18 y and with incomes below the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program thresholds, served themselves from a buffet; amounts taken as well as plate waste were unobtrusively weighed to enable calculation of true intake for 3 meals. The following day, women completed ASA24-2016 independently (n = 148) or with assistance from a trained paraprofessional in a small group (n = 154). Regression modeling examined differences by condition in agreement between true and reported foods; energy, nutrient, and food group intakes; and portion sizes. Results: Participants who completed ASA24 independently and those who received assistance reported matches for 71.9% and 73.5% (P = 0.56) of items truly consumed, respectively. Exclusions (consumed but not reported) were highest for lunch (at which participants consumed approximately 2 times the number of distinct foods and beverages compared with breakfast and dinner). Commonly excluded foods were additions to main dishes (e.g., tomatoes in salad). On average, excluded foods contributed 43.6 g (46.2 kcal) and 40.1 g (43.2 kcal) among those in the independent and assisted conditions, respectively. Gaps between true and reported intake were different between conditions for folate and iron. Within conditions, significant gaps were observed for protein, vitamin D, and meat (both conditions); vitamin A, iron, and magnesium (independent); and folate, calcium, and vegetables (assisted). For foods and beverages for which matches were reported, no difference in the gap between true and reported portion sizes was observed by condition (P = 0.22). Conclusions: ASA24 performed relatively well among women with low incomes; however, accuracy was somewhat lower than previously observed among adults with a range of incomes. The provision of assistance did not significantly impact accuracy.

The Use of Digital Images in 24-Hour Recalls May Lead to Less Misestimation of Portion Size Compared with Traditional Interviewer-Administered Recalls.

BACKGROUND: The Automated Self-Administered 24-hour (ASA24) dietary recall system enhances the feasibility of collecting high-quality intake data in population-based studies. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of portion size reporting in the ASA24 compared with interviewer-administered recalls. METHODS: True intake for 3 meals was ascertained in 81 adults aged 20-70 y from the Washington, DC area. Participants were randomly assigned to complete an unannounced ASA24 or an interviewer-administered Automated Multiple-Pass Method (AMPM) recall the following day. An adapted Bland-Altman approach was used to assess agreement between true and reported portion sizes. Linear regression was used to assess log-scale differences between true and reported portion sizes by recall mode. The proportions of reported portion sizes within 10% and 25% of truth were estimated. Analyses were conducted for all foods and drinks and predetermined categories. RESULTS: Mean differences between true and reported portion sizes were 3.7 g for the ASA24 and 11.8 g for the AMPM. According to the Bland-Altman-type plots, between 92% and 100% (depending on food or drink category and recall mode) of observations fell within the limits of agreement. After adjustment for multiple testing, the mean ratio of reported to true portion sizes was significantly >1 for the categories of all foods and drinks, all foods excluding liquids, amorphous or soft foods, and small pieces among AMPM respondents. Misestimation in the AMPM was significantly different from that in the ASA24 for all foods and drinks and for all foods excluding liquids. Small proportions of reported portions fell within 10% (16.2% for the ASA24 and 14.9% for the AMPM) and 25% (37.5% for the ASA24 and 33.2% for the AMPM) of truth. CONCLUSIONS: The results raise the possibility that digital images tailored to different types and formats of foods may facilitate improved estimation of amounts eaten but highlight the need for continued work in this aspect of dietary assessment. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00978406.

Comparison of Interviewer-Administered and Automated Self-Administered 24-Hour Dietary Recalls in 3 Diverse Integrated Health Systems.

Twenty-four-hour dietary recalls provide high-quality intake data but have been prohibitively expensive for large epidemiologic studies. This study's goal was to assess whether the web-based Automated Self-Administered 24-Hour Recall (ASA24) performs similarly enough to the standard interviewer-administered, Automated Multiple-Pass Method (AMPM) 24-hour dietary recall to be considered a viable alternative. In 2010-2011, 1,081 adults from 3 integrated health systems in Detroit, Michigan; Marshfield, Wisconsin; and Kaiser-Permanente Northern California participated in a field trial. A quota design ensured a diverse sample by sex, age, and race/ethnicity. Each participant was asked to complete 2 recalls and was randomly assigned to 1 of 4 protocols differing by type of recall and administration order. For energy, the mean intakes were 2,425 versus 2,374 kcal for men and 1,876 versus 1,906 kcal for women by AMPM and ASA24, respectively. Of 20 nutrients/food groups analyzed and controlling for false discovery rate, 87% were judged equivalent at the 20% bound. ASA24 was preferred over AMPM by 70% of the respondents. Attrition was lower in the ASA24/AMPM study group than in the AMPM/ASA24 group, and it was lower in the ASA24/ASA24 group than in the AMPM/AMPM group. ASA24 offers the potential to collect high-quality dietary intake information at low cost with less attrition.

Performance of the Automated Self-Administered 24-hour Recall relative to a measure of true intakes and to an interviewer-administered 24-h recall.

BACKGROUND: The Automated Self-Administered 24-hour Recall (ASA24), a freely available Web-based tool, was developed to enhance the feasibility of collecting high-quality dietary intake data from large samples. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the criterion validity of ASA24 through a feeding study in which the true intake for 3 meals was known. DESIGN: True intake and plate waste from 3 meals were ascertained for 81 adults by inconspicuously weighing foods and beverages offered at a buffet before and after each participant served him- or herself. Participants were randomly assigned to complete an ASA24 or an interviewer-administered Automated Multiple-Pass Method (AMPM) recall the following day. With the use of linear and Poisson regression analysis, we examined the associations between recall mode and 1) the proportions of items consumed for which a match was reported and that were excluded, 2) the number of intrusions (items reported but not consumed), and 3) differences between energy, nutrient, food group, and portion size estimates based on true and reported intakes. RESULTS: Respondents completing ASA24 reported 80% of items truly consumed compared with 83% in AMPM (P = 0.07). For both ASA24 and AMPM, additions to or ingredients in multicomponent foods and drinks were more frequently omitted than were main foods or drinks. The number of intrusions was higher in ASA24 (P < 0.01). Little evidence of differences by recall mode was found in the gap between true and reported energy, nutrient, and food group intakes or portion sizes. CONCLUSIONS: Although the interviewer-administered AMPM performed somewhat better relative to true intakes for matches, exclusions, and intrusions, ASA24 performed well. Given the substantial cost savings that ASA24 offers, it has the potential to make important contributions to research aimed at describing the diets of populations, assessing the effect of interventions on diet, and elucidating diet and health relations. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00978406.

Simulated adaptations to an adult dietary self-report tool to accommodate children: impact on nutrient estimates.

OBJECTIVE: To simulate the effect of child-friendly (CF) adaptations of the National Cancer Institute's Automated Self-Administered 24-Hour Dietary Recall (ASA24) on estimates of nutrient intake. METHOD: One hundred twenty children, 8-13 years old, entered their previous day's intake using the ASA24 and completed an interviewer-administered recall using the Nutrition Data System for Research (NDSR). Based on a hypothesis that proposed adaptations to the ASA24 will not significantly affect mean nutrient estimates, ASA24 data were manipulated postadministration to simulate a CF version in which 2 categories of data collection were removed: (1) foods not likely to be consumed by children (45%) based on previous analyses of national dietary data and (2) food detail questions (probes) to which children are unlikely to know the answers (46%), based on our experience. RESULTS: Mean estimates of select nutrients between the beta version of ASA24 and the simulated CF recall showed no significant differences, indicating that the food and probe elimination did not significantly affect results. However, a comparison of total sugar and vitamin C assessments between the original ASA24, the CF version, and NDSR showed that the daily nutrient totals for both nutrients were significantly higher in the self-administered methods (both ASA24 and CF version) than in NDSR (interviewer-administered), which warrants a review of different methods for obtaining information about foods that are sources of these nutrients. CONCLUSION: The simulation of CF adaptations showed that it is feasible to implement, thereby reducing CF response burden without significantly affecting the results.