An index measuring adherence to New Zealand Infant Feeding Guidelines has convergent validity with maternal socio-demographic and health behaviours and with children's body size.

Using data from a nationally generalisable birth cohort, we aimed to: (i) describe the cohort's adherence to national evidence-based dietary guidelines using an Infant Feeding Index (IFI) and (ii) assess the IFI's convergent construct validity, by exploring associations with antenatal maternal socio-demographic and health behaviours and with child overweight/obesity and central adiposity at age 54 months. Data were from the Growing Up in New Zealand cohort (n 6343). The IFI scores ranged from zero to twelve points, with twelve representing full adherence to the guidelines. Overweight/obesity was defined by BMI-for-age (based on the WHO Growth Standards). Central adiposity was defined as waist-to-height ratio > 90th percentile. Associations were tested using multiple linear regression and Poisson regression with robust variance (risk ratios, 95 % CI). Mean IFI score was 8·2 (sd 2·1). Maternal characteristics explained 29·1 % of variation in the IFI score. Maternal age, education and smoking had the strongest independent relationships with IFI scores. Compared with children in the highest IFI tertile, girls in the lowest and middle tertiles were more likely to be overweight/obese (1·46, 1·03, 2·06 and 1·56, 1·09, 2·23, respectively) and boys in the lowest tertile were more likely to have central adiposity (1·53, 1·02, 2·30) at age 54 months. Most infants fell short of meeting national Infant Feeding Guidelines. The associations between IFI score and maternal characteristics, and children's overweight/obesity/central adiposity, were in the expected directions and confirm the IFI's convergent construct validity.

Performance of statistical methods to correct food intake distribution: comparison between observed and estimated usual intake.

There are statistical methods that remove the within-person random error and estimate the usual intake when there is a second 24-h recall (24HR) for at least a subsample of the study population. We aimed to compare the distribution of usual food intake estimated by statistical models with the distribution of observed usual intake. A total of 302 individuals from Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) answered twenty, non-consecutive 24HR; the average length of follow-up was 3 months. The usual food intake was considered as the average of the 20 collection days of food intake. Using data sets with a pair of 2 collection days, usual percentiles of intake of the selected foods using two methods were estimated (National Cancer Institute (NCI) method and Multiple Source Method (MSM)). These estimates were compared with the percentiles of the observed usual intake. Selected foods comprised a range of parameter distributions: skewness, percentage of zero intakes and within- and between-person intakes. Both methods performed well but failed in some situations. In most cases, NCI and MSM produced similar percentiles between each other and values very close to the true intake, and they better represented the usual intake compared with 2-d mean. The smallest precision was observed in the upper tail of the distribution. In spite of the underestimation and overestimation of percentiles of intake, from a public health standpoint, these biases appear not to be of major concern.