CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 176Nutritional Studies and DietNutrition, Health and Food BehaviorNutrition and Health Studies

Dietary Assessment Toolkits: An Overview

Open access
Dao, Maria Carlota, Subar, Amy F, Warthon-Medina, Marisol, Cade, Janet E, Burrows, Tracy, Golley, Rebecca K, Forouhi, Nita G, Pearce, Matthew +1 more·2019·Public Health Nutrition
DOI 10.1017/s1368980018002951PMC PMC6368251
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Objective: A wide variety of methods are available to assess dietary intake, each one with different strengths and weaknesses. Researchers face multiple challenges when diet and nutrition need to be accurately assessed, particularly in the selection of the most appropriate dietary assessment method for their study. The goal of the current collaborative work is to present a collection of available resources for dietary assessment implementation. Design/Setting/Participants: As a follow-up to the 9th International Conference on Diet and Physical Activity Methods held in 2015, developers of dietary assessment toolkits agreed to collaborate in the preparation of the present paper, which provides an overview of each toolkit. The toolkits presented include: the Diet, Anthropometry and Physical Activity Measurement Toolkit (DAPA; UK); the National Cancer Institute’s (NCI) Dietary Assessment Primer (USA); the Nutritools website (UK); the Australasian Child and Adolescent Obesity Research Network (ACAORN) method selector (Australia); and the Danone Dietary Assessment Toolkit (DanoneDAT; France). An at-a-glance summary of features and comparison of the toolkits is provided. Results: The present review contains general background on dietary assessment, along with a summary of each of the included toolkits, a feature comparison table and direct links to each toolkit, all of which are freely available online. Conclusions: This overview of dietary assessment toolkits provides comprehensive information to aid users in the selection and implementation of the most appropriate dietary assessment method, or combination of methods, with the goal of collecting the highest-quality dietary data possible.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1368980018002951

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Measuring dietary intake is particularly difficult and subject to both random and systematic measurement errors, so practitioners must know the strengths and weaknesses of each method.

    “Measuring the dietary intake of subjects, however, is particularly difficult and subject to both random and systematic measurement errors, so it is of great importance for the practitioner to know the strengths and weaknesses of each of the methods.”

    From The Seven Methods for the Evaluation of Nutritional Status—ABCDEFG: Narrative Review (2026) · cites this paper as [47]

    The Introduction describes dietary assessment as complicated and says methods have different strengths and weaknesses. “The case for toolkits to guide dietary assessment choice” identifies multiple sources of error and explicitly discusses systematic bias. Our copy does not explicitly identify random measurement error, so that specific part of the claim is not established. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. [1]Subar AF Freedman LS Tooze JA Addressing Current Criticism Regarding the Value of Self-Report Dietary Data J Nutr 2015 145 2639 2645 26468491 PMC4656907
  2. [2]Bates CJ Bogin B Holmes BA Nutritional Assessment Methods Human Nutrition 13th edn Oxford University Press 2017 Chapter 32 613 646
  3. [3]Gemming L Utter J Ni Mhurchu C Image-assisted dietary assessment: a systematic review of the evidence J Acad Nutr Diet 2015 115 64 77 25441955
  4. [4]Hassannejad H Matrella G Ciampolini P Automatic diet monitoring: a review of computer vision and wearable sensor-based methods Int J Food Sci Nutr 2017 68 656 670 28139173
  5. [6]Day N McKeown N Wong M Epidemiological assessment of diet: a comparison of a 7-day diary with a food frequency questionnaire using urinary markers of nitrogen, potassium and sodium Int J Epidemiol 2001 30 309 317 11369735
  6. [7]Cade JE Burley VJ Greenwood DC The UK Women’s Cohort Study: comparison of vegetarians, fish-eaters and meat-eaters Public Health Nutr 2004 7 871 878 15482612
  7. [8]Dalmeijer GW Struijk EA van der Schouw YT Dairy intake and coronary heart disease or stroke--a population-based cohort study Int J Cardiol 2013 167 925 929 22483419
  8. [9]Rizzo NS Jaceldo-Siegl K Sabate J Nutrient profiles of vegetarian and nonvegetarian dietary patterns J Acad Nutr Diet 2013 113 1610 1619 23988511 PMC4081456
  9. [10]Moskal A Pisa PT Ferrari P Nutrient patterns and their food sources in an International Study Setting: report from the EPIC study PloS One 2014 9 e98647 24901309 PMC4047062
  10. [11]Cade J Thompson R Burley V Development, validation and utilisation of food-frequency questionnaires - a review Public Health Nutr 2002 5 567 587 12186666
  11. [12]Robertson C Conway R Dennis B Attainment of precision in implementation of 24 h dietary recalls: INTERMAP UK Br J Nutr 2005 94 588 594 16197585 PMC6660155
  12. [14]Castetbon K Vernay M Malon A Dietary intake, physical activity and nutritional status in adults: the French nutrition and health survey (ENNS, 2006-2007) Br J Nutr 2009 102 733 743 19250574
  13. [15]Rehm CD Peñalvo JL Afshin A Dietary Intake Among US Adults, 1999-2012 JAMA 2016 315 2542 2553 27327801 PMC6287627
  14. [16]Albar SA Alwan NA Evans CEL Agreement between an online dietary assessment tool (myfood24) and an interviewer-administered 24-h dietary recall in British adolescents aged 11-18 years Br J Nutr 2016 115 1678 1686 26975650
  15. [17]Carter MC Albar SA Morris MA Development of a UK Online 24-h Dietary Assessment Tool: myfood24 Nutrients 2015 7 4016 4032 26024292 PMC4488770
  16. [20]Prentice RL Caan B Chlebowski RT Low-fat dietary pattern and risk of invasive breast cancer: the Women’s Health Initiative Randomized Controlled Dietary Modification Trial JAMA 2006 295 629 642 16467232
  17. [21]Cantwell MM Millen AE Carroll R A debriefing session with a nutritionist can improve dietary assessment using food diaries J Nutr 2006 136 440 445 16424125
  18. [23]Westerterp KP Goris AHC Validity of the assessment of dietary intake: problems of misreporting Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 2002 5 489 493 12172471
  19. [24]Poslusna K Ruprich J de Vries JHM Misreporting of energy and micronutrient intake estimated by food records and 24 hour recalls, control and adjustment methods in practice Br J Nutr 2009 101 Suppl 2 S73 85 19594967
  20. [25]Macdiarmid JI Blundell JE Dietary under-reporting: what people say about recording their food intake Eur J Clin Nutr 1997 51 199 200 9076412
  21. [26]Johansson L Solvoll K Bjorneboe GE Under- and overreporting of energy intake related to weight status and lifestyle in a nationwide sample Am J Clin Nutr 1998 68 266 74 9701182
  22. [27]Bell W Colaiezzi BA Prata CS Scaling up Dietary Data for Decision-Making in Low-Income Countries: New Technological Frontiers Adv Nutr Bethesda Md 2017 8 916 932 PMC5683006 29141974
  23. [28]Coates JC Colaiezzi BA Bell W Overcoming Dietary Assessment Challenges in Low-Income Countries: Technological Solutions Proposed by the International Dietary Data Expansion (INDDEX) Project Nutrients 2017 9 PMC5372952 28300759
  24. [31]Lachat C Hawwash D Ocké MC Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology-Nutritional Epidemiology (STROBE-nut): An Extension of the STROBE Statement PLoS Med 2016 13 e1002036 27270749 PMC4896435
  25. [33]Thompson FE Kirkpatrick SI Subar AF The National Cancer Institute’s Dietary Assessment Primer: A Resource for Diet Research J Acad Nutr Diet 2015 115 1986 1995 26422452 PMC4663113
  26. [34]Carroll RJ Midthune D Subar AF Taking advantage of the strengths of 2 different dietary assessment instruments to improve intake estimates for nutritional epidemiology Am J Epidemiol 2012 175 340 347 22273536 PMC3271815
  27. [36]Cade JE Warthon-Medina M Albar S DIET@NET: Best Practice Guidelines for dietary assessment in health research BMC Med 2017 15 202 29137630 PMC5686956
  28. [37]Hooson J Hancock N Greenwood DC A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews of Validated Dietary Assessment Tools Proc Nutr Soc 2016 75
  29. [38]Finglas P Roe M Pinchen H McCance and Widdowson’s The Composition of Foods: Seventh Summary Edition 7 edition Cambridge Royal Society of Chemistry 2014
  30. [41]Burrows T Golley RK Khambalia A The quality of dietary intake methodology and reporting in child and adolescent obesity intervention trials: a systematic review Obes Rev Off J Int Assoc Study Obes 2012 13 1125 1138 22891692
  31. [42]Magarey A Watson J Golley RK Assessing dietary intake in children and adolescents: Considerations and recommendations for obesity research Int J Pediatr Obes IJPO Off J Int Assoc Study Obes 2011 6 2 11 20874449
  32. [43]Golley RK McNaughton SA Collins CE Australasian nutrition research for prevention and management of child obesity: innovation and progress in the last decade Pediatr Obes 2014 9 e132 e136 24687973
  33. [44]Schofield WN Predicting basal metabolic rate, new standards and review of previous work Hum Nutr Clin Nutr 1985 39 Suppl 1 5 41 4044297

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dao, M. C., Subar, A. F., Warthon-Medina, M., Cade, J. E., Burrows, T., Golley, R. K., Forouhi, N. G., Pearce, M., & Holmes, B. A.
Affiliations
  • Inserm (FR)
  • National Cancer Institute (US)
  • University of Leeds (GB)
  • University of Newcastle Australia (AU)
  • Flinders University (AU)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • Danone (France) (FR)
Corresponding author
Holmes, Bridget A
ORCID
Venue
Public Health Nutrition
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2018-11-15
Volume
22
Issue
3
Pages
404-418
ISSN
  • 1368-9800 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-2727
DOI
10.1017/s1368980018002951
PMC
PMC6368251
OpenAlex
W2901327218
Cited by
176
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 1
FWCI
1.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified)
Locations
  • Public Health Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • NOVA (University of Newcastle Australia) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion)
  • NOVA (University of Newcastle Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Apollo
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research ([IS-BRC-1215-20014)
  • Cambridge University Hospitals (146281)
  • Medical Research Council (MC_UU_12015/5, MC_UU_12015/3, MR/L02019X/1)
  • Defense Acquisition Program Administration
  • National Cancer Institute
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutrition and Health Studies
Keywords
dietary assessment, method selection, child and adolescent obesity
MeSH terms
Anthropometry, Diet Surveys, Eating, Humans, Software, Nutrition Assessment, Internet

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review