Validation of weighed records and other methods of dietary assessment using the 24 h urine nitrogen technique and other biological markers
Open accessAbstract
Results from analysis of 24 h urine collections, verified for completeness with para-amino benzoic acid, and blood samples collected over 1 year were compared with 16 d weighed records of all food consumed collected over the year, and with results from 24 h recalls, food-frequency questionnaires and estimated food records in 160 women. Using the weighed records, individuals were sorted into quintiles of the distribution of the urine N excretion: dietary N intake ratio (UN:DN). UN exceeded DN in the top quintile of this ratio; mean ratio UN:DN = 1·13 Individuals in this top quintile were heavier, had significantly greater body mass indices, were reportedly more restrained eaters, had significantly lower energy intake:basal metabolic rate ratios (EI:BMR), and had correlated ratios of UN:DN and EI:BMR (r- 0·62). Those in the top quintile reported lower intakes of energy and energy-yielding nutrients, Ca, fats, cakes, breakfast cereals, milk and sugars than individuals in the other quintiles but not lower intakes of non-starch polysaccharides, vitamin C, vegetables, potatoes or meat. Correlations between dietary intake from weighed records and 24 h urine K were 0·74 and 0·82, and between dietary vitamin C and β-carotene and plasma vitamin C and β-carotene 0·86 and 0·48. Correlations between dietary N intake from weighed records and 24 h urine excretion were high (0·78–0·87). Those between N from estimated food records and urine N were r 0·60–0·70. Correlations between urine N and 24 h recalls and food-frequency questionnaires were in the order of 0·01 to 0·5. Despite problems of underreporting in overweight individuals in 20% of this sample, weighed records remained the most accurate method of dietary assessment, and only an estimated 7 d diary was able to approach this accuracy.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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 FFQ used to assess diet was validated.
“At recruitment, participants completed a validated semi-quantitative FFQ,12, 13 with additional questions on smoking status, height and weight.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 33 · Cited by 377
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Hallfrisch, J. (1995). What do people really eat? In Proceedings of the Fgteenth International Congress OfNutrition, Adelaide (In the Press).
- Authors
- Bingham, S. A., Cassidy, A., Cole, T. J., Welch, A., Runswick, S. A., Black, A. E., Thurnham, D., Bates, C., Khaw, K. T., Key, T. J. A., & Day, N. E.
- Affiliations
- University of Ulster (GB)
- Addenbrooke's Hospital (GB)
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- Venue
- British Journal of Nutrition
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 1995-04
- Volume
- 73
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 531-550
- ISSN
- 0007-1145 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-2662
- OpenAlex
- W1984692429
- Cited by
- 377
- References
- 33
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 22
- FWCI
- 12.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- British Journal Of Nutrition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutrition and Health Studies
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
- Keywords
- dietary assessment, nitrogen intake, dietary assessment accuracy, food frequency questionnaire, body mass index, women, biomarkers, plasma vitamin C, beta-carotene, urinary potassium
- MeSH terms
- Basal Metabolism, Body Weight, Energy Intake, Diet, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Nitrogen, Reproducibility of Results, Biomarkers, Diet Records, Body Mass Index
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