Validity and reproducibility of a web-based, self-administered food frequency questionnaire
Abstract
Background/objectives To assess the validity and the reproducibility of a newly developed web-based, self-administered food frequency questionnaire (web-FFQ).Subjects/methods A total of 74 healthy subjects (34 men and 40 women) from the Québec City metropolitan area were asked to complete, in random order, the web-FFQ, a validated interviewer-administered FFQ (IA-FFQ) and a 3-day food record (3-day FR).Results Mean intakes of 17/22 nutrients assessed between the web-FFQ and the 3-day FR were not significantly different (differences <10%, P≥0.11). Sex and energy-adjusted de-attenuated Pearson correlation coefficients for each nutrient varied from 0.12-0.98 (mean R=0.55, 95% confidence interval 0.46; 0.63) between the web-FFQ and the 3-day FR. All correlations were significant (P≤0.01) and above 0.34 (mean R=0.59, 95% confidence interval 0.54; 0.65) between the web-FFQ and the IA-FFQ, except for sodium (R=0.17, P=0.14). Cross-classification analysis revealed that on average, 77% of subjects were classified in the same or adjacent quartile of nutrient intake between the web-FFQ and the 3-day FR. Correlation coefficients for reproducibility of the web-FFQ tested 4-6 weeks apart in the same individuals were all equal or above 0.48 (P≤0.0001; mean R=0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.68; 0.76). More than 90% of the subjects were classified in the same or adjacent quartile between the two administrations of the web-FFQ, while only 0.8% was misclassified.Conclusions These data demonstrate that the newly developed web-based FFQ appears to have reasonable validity and good reproducibility for assessing nutrient intakes at the group and individual levels in a population of healthy adults.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The mean unadjusted correlation coefficient (r=.75) for energy and nutrient intake compared well with previous studies on both computerized and non-Web-based FFQ.
“The mean unadjusted correlation coefficient (r=.75) for energy and nutrient intake compared well with previous studies on both computerized [21,30-31] and non-Web-based FFQ [23,32-35].”
From Online dietary intake estimation: reproducibility and validity of the Food4Me Food frequency questionnaire against a 4-day weighed food record (2014) · cites this paper as [21]
The pattern of higher estimated energy and nutrient intakes on the first administration of the Food4Me FFQ has been observed in numerous other reproducibility studies.
“This pattern has been observed in numerous other reproducibility studies [21,31-32], and is proposed to result from learning effects and questionnaire fatigue [39].”
From Online dietary intake estimation: reproducibility and validity of the Food4Me Food frequency questionnaire against a 4-day weighed food record (2014) · cites this paper as [21]
It is thought that individuals may be able to more accurately estimate the consumption of some foods (eg, alcoholic beverages) than others, as was the case in the present study.
“It is thought that individuals may be able to more accurately estimate the consumption of some foods (eg, alcoholic beverages) than others, as was the case in the present study [21,44].”
From Online dietary intake estimation: reproducibility and validity of the Food4Me Food frequency questionnaire against a 4-day weighed food record (2014) · cites this paper as [21]
Cites
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
Martin Bland, J., & Altman, D. (1986) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8 · Cited by 47,965 · see citing works
Beckett, A. H., Rowland, M., & TURNER, P. (1965) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(65)91037-8 · Cited by 16,917 · see citing works
Willett, W. C. (1998) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195122978.001.0001 · Cited by 4,541 · see citing works
Reproducibility and validity of a semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire
WILLETT, W. C., SAMPSON, L., STAMPFER, M. J., ROSNER, B., BAIN, C., WITSCHI, J., HENNEKENS, C. H., & SPEIZER, F. E. (1985) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a114086 · Cited by 4,274 · see citing works
Adjustment for total energy intake in epidemiologic studies
Willett, W. C., Howe, G., & Kushi, L. H. (1997) · American Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1093/ajcn/65.4.1220s · Cited by 3,747 · see citing works
Development, validation and utilisation of food-frequency questionnaires – a review
Cade, J., Thompson, R., Burley, V., & Warm, D. (2002) · Public Health Nutrition · doi:10.1079/phn2001318 · Cited by 1,423 · see citing works
Brener, N. D., Billy, J. O. G., & Grady, W. R. (2003) · Journal of Adolescent Health · doi:10.1016/s1054-139x(03)00052-1 · Cited by 1,331 · see citing works
Sources of data for developing and maintaining a nutrient database.
Schakel, S., Sievert, Y. A., & Buzzard, I. M. (1988) · Journal of the American Dietetic Association · doi:10.1016/s0002-8223(21)07997-9 · Cited by 757 · see citing works
Food-frequency questionnaires: a review of their design, validation and utilisation
Cade, J. E., Burley, V. J., Warm, D. L., Thompson, R. L., & Margetts, B. M. (2004) · Nutrition Research Reviews · doi:10.1079/nrr200370 · Cited by 518 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Cade et al. (2004) and Tsubono et al. (1995) have shown that correlation coefficients between repeat administrations of a FFQ are lower (0.06–0.15 lower) when the questionnaire is repeated after a long time interval (from 6 months to 1 year later) compared with a shorter time interval (1–6 months).”
BackgroundInfluentialMasson, L., MCNeill, G., Tomany, J., Simpson, J., Peace, H., Wei, L., Grubb, D., & Bolton-Smith, C. (2003) · Public Health Nutrition · doi:10.1079/phn2002429 · Cited by 423 · see citing works
Validity and reliability of the Block98 food-frequency questionnaire in a sample of Canadian women
Boucher, B. A., Cotterchio, M., Kreiger, N., Nadalin, V., Block, T. J., & Block, G. (2006) · Public Health Nutrition · doi:10.1079/phn2005763 · Cited by 335 · see citing works
Food Photography I: the perception of food portion size from photographs
Nelson, M., Atkinson, M., & Darbyshire, S. (1994) · British Journal Of Nutrition · doi:10.1079/bjn19940069 · Cited by 199 · see citing works
Future directions in the development of food-frequency questionnaires
Willett, W. C. (1994) · American Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1093/ajcn/59.1.171s · Cited by 194 · see citing works
Goulet, J., Nadeau, G., Lapointe, A., Lamarche, B., & Lemieux, S. (2004) · Nutrition Journal · doi:10.1186/1475-2891-3-13 · Cited by 173 · see citing works
Self-citationDeveloping dietary assessment tools
Subar, A. F. (2004) · Journal of the American Dietetic Association · doi:10.1016/j.jada.2004.02.007 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Validity and Reproducibility of an Adolescent Web-Based Food Frequency Questionnaire
Matthys, C., Pynaert, I., Keyzer, W. D., & Henauw, S. D. (2007) · Journal of the American Dietetic Association · doi:10.1016/j.jada.2007.01.005 · Cited by 108 · see citing works
Development and Validation of a Food Frequency Questionnaire
Shatenstein, B., Nadon, S., Godin, C., & Ferland, G. (2005) · Canadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and Research · doi:10.3148/66.2.2005.67 · Cited by 100 · see citing works
Relative validity of a food frequency questionnaire used in the Inter99 study
Toft, U., Kristoffersen, L., Ladelund, S., Bysted, A., Jakobsen, J., Lau, C. J., Jørgensen, T., Borch‐Johnsen, K., & Ovesen, L. (2007) · European Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602815 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
Probst, Y., & Tapsell, L. C. (2005) · Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior · doi:10.1016/s1499-4046(06)60255-8 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Temporal Change in the Reproducibility of a Self-administered Food Frequency Questionnaire
Tsubono, Y., Nishino, Y., Fukao, A., Hisamichi, S., & Tsugane, S. (1995) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a117582 · Cited by 73 · cited 4× · see citing works
“Cade et al. (2004) and Tsubono et al. (1995) have shown that correlation coefficients between repeat administrations of a FFQ are lower (0.06–0.15 lower) when the questionnaire is repeated after a long time interval (from 6 months to 1 year later) compared with a shorter time interval (1–6 months).”
BackgroundInfluentialVereecken, C. A., Bourdeaudhuij, I. D., Maes, L., & on behalf of the HELENA study group (2010) · European Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1038/ejcn.2010.24 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
Evaluation of a web-based, pictorial diet history questionnaire
Beasley, J. M., Davis, A., & Riley, W. T. (2009) · Public Health Nutrition · doi:10.1017/s1368980008002668 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Apovian, C. M., Murphy, M. C., Cullum‐Dugan, D., Lin, P., Gilbert, K. M., Coffman, G. A., Jenkins, M., Bakun, P. J., Tucker, K. L., & Moore, T. J. (2009) · Public Health Nutrition · doi:10.1017/s1368980009991996 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Development and validiation of a food frequency questionnaire
Shatenstein, B. (2005) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Turconi, G. M. C., Bazzano, R., Roggi, C., & Cena, H. (2010) · International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition · doi:10.3109/09637486.2010.495329 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Fidanza, F., Gentile, M. G., & Porrini, M. (1995) · European Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1007/bf01719482 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
Wong, S. S., Boushey, C. J., Novotny, R., & Gustafson, D. R. (2008) · Journal of the American Dietetic Association · doi:10.1016/j.jada.2007.12.006 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Reproducibility and comparability of a computerized, self‐administered food frequency questionnaire
Engle, A., Lynn, L. L., Koury, K., & Boyar, A. P. (1990) · Nutrition and Cancer · doi:10.1080/01635589009514070 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Comparative Validity of a Food Frequency Questionnaire for Adults with IDDM
Riley, M. D., & Blizzard, L. (1995) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/diacare.18.9.1249 · Cited by 35 · cited 1× · see citing works
“This observation has also been reported in previous studies assessing reproducibility of web-based and IA dietary assessment tools (Riley and Blizzard, 1995; Goulet et al., 2004; Beasley et al., 2009).”
Result
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Allaire, J., Couture, P., Leclerc, M., Charest, A., Marin, J., Lépine, M.-C., Talbot, D., Tchernof, A., & Lamarche, B. (2016) · The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.3945/ajcn.116.131896 · Cited by 252 · see citing works
Self-citationFallaize, R., Forster, H., Macready, A. L., Walsh, M. C., Mathers, J. C., Brennan, L., Gibney, E. R., Gibney, M. J., & Lovegrove, J. A. (2014) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.3355 · Cited by 210 · see citing works
Online dietary intake estimation: the Food4Me food frequency questionnaire
Forster, H., Fallaize, R., Gallagher, C., O’Donovan, C. B., Woolhead, C., Walsh, M. C., Macready, A. L., Lovegrove, J. A., Mathers, J. C., Gibney, M. J., et al. (2014) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.3105 · Cited by 151 · see citing works
Pouliot-Mathieu, K., Gardner-Fortier, C., Lemieux, S., St-Gelais, D., Champagne, C. P., & Vuillemard, J.-C. (2013) · PharmaNutrition · doi:10.1016/j.phanu.2013.06.003 · Cited by 96 · see citing works
Emerging trends of technology-based dietary assessment: a perspective study
Zhao, X., Xu, X., Li, X., He, X., Yang, Y., & Zhu, S. (2021) · European Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1038/s41430-020-00779-0 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
- Authors
- Labonté, M.-È., Cyr, A., Baril-Gravel, L., Royer, M.-M., & Lamarche, B.
- Affiliations
- Université Laval (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Lamarche, B
- Venue
- European Journal of Clinical Nutrition
- Published
- 2011-09-21
- Volume
- 66
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 166-173
- ISSN
- 0954-3007 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-5640
- OpenAlex
- W2088060170
- Cited by
- 189
- References
- 29
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 6.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
- Keywords
- questionnaire validity, reproducibility, nutrient intake assessment, 3-day food record, healthy adults
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Energy Intake, Diet, Diet Surveys, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reproducibility of Results, Diet Records, Internet, Young Adult
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
