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.