RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Dietary pattern is a determinant of chronic disease, but nonregistered dietitian nutritionist (non-RDN) clinicians rarely assess diet because of barriers such as time constraints and lack of valid, brief diet quality assessment tools. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to evaluate the relative validity of a brief diet quality screener using both a numeric scoring system and a simple traffic light scoring system. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was conducted using the CloudResearch online platform to compare participants' responses to the 13-item rapid Prime Diet Quality Score screener (rPDQS) and the Automated Self-Administered 24-hour (ASA24) Dietary Assessment Tool. PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: The study was conducted in July and August 2021 and included 482 adults ≥18 years of age or older sampled to be representative of the US population. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: All participants completed the rPDQS and an ASA24; of these, 190 completed a second ASA24 and rPDQS. Responses to rPDQS items were coded using both traffic light (eg, green = healthiest intake, red = least healthy intake) and numeric (eg, consume < 1 time a week, consume ≥ 2 times per day) scoring methods and were compared with food group equivalents and Healthy Eating Index-2015 (HEI-2015) scores estimated from ASA24s. STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Deattenuated Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to account for within-person variation in 24-hour diet recalls. RESULTS: Overall, 49% of participants were female, 62% were ≥35 years, and 66% were non-Hispanic White, 13% non-Hispanic Black, 16% Hispanic/Latino, and 5% Asian. For both food groups to encourage (eg, vegetables, whole grains) and to consume in moderation (eg, processed meats, sweets), there were statistically significant associations with intakes assessed by rPDQS, using both traffic light and numeric scoring methods. Total rPDQS scores correlated with the HEI-2015, r = 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.65, 0.82). CONCLUSIONS: The rPDQS is a valid, brief diet quality screener that identifies clinically relevant patterns of food intake. Future research is needed to test whether the simple traffic light scoring system is an effective tool that can help non-RDN clinicians provide brief dietary counseling or make referrals to registered dietitian nutritionists, as needed.