The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Relative validity of a short qualitative food frequency questionnaire for use in food consumption surveys
Overview
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
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“The FFQ has been tested and validated for assessing food consumption with 7-day estimated diet records [38].”
From Nutritional Status and Cardiovascular Health in Female Adolescent Elite-Level Artistic Gymnasts and Swimmers: A Cross-Sectional Study of 31 Athletes (2021) · cites this paper as [38]
In the citing paper
“Importantly, the relative validity of the used FFQ was previously compared with 7-day estimated diet records, and the results suggested that this FFQ is reasonably valid in both genders and across different age categories for most food groups. However, poor ranking agreement was found for some food groups (e.g., bread and cereals, potatoes, and grains) [38].”
From Nutritional Status and Cardiovascular Health in Female Adolescent Elite-Level Artistic Gymnasts and Swimmers: A Cross-Sectional Study of 31 Athletes (2021) · cites this paper as [38]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
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
Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement
Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (2010) · International Journal of Nursing Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.10.001 · Cited by 5,220
Fernández-Ballart, J. D., Piñol, J. L., Zazpe, I., Corella, D., Carrasco, P., Toledo, E., Perez-Bauer, M., Martínez-González, M. Á., Salas-Salvadó, J., & Martín-Moreno, J. M. (2010) · British Journal of Nutrition · doi:10.1017/s0007114509993837 · Cited by 898
Research works printed but not linked: 11
- 2005, ARCH PUB HEALTH, 63, 1
- Andersen, 2002, The European Journal of Public Health, 12, 208, 10.1093/eurpub/12.3.208 · DOI
- OSLER, 1996, International Journal of Epidemiology, 25, 1023, 10.1093/ije/25.5.1023 · DOI
- Thompson, 2002, Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 102, 1764, 10.1016/S0002-8223(02)90379-2 · DOI · Paper page
- 1997, ARCH PUBLIC HEALTH, 55, 1
- Beaton, 1979, The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 32, 2546, 10.1093/ajcn/32.12.2546 · DOI · Paper page
- Mikkelsen, 2007, Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 35, 172, 10.1080/14034940600975625 · DOI
- Wakai, 2009, Journal of epidemiology / Japan Epidemiological Association, 19, 1, 10.2188/jea.JE20081007 · DOI
- 2009, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 63, S64, 10.1038/ejcn.2008.67 · DOI
- Noethlings, 2003, The Journal of Nutrition, 133, 510, 10.1093/jn/133.2.510 · DOI
- HUNTER, 1988, American Journal of Epidemiology, 127, 1240, 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a114916 · DOI
Cited by
Clarys, P., Deliens, T., Huybrechts, I., Deriemaeker, P., Vanaelst, B., De Keyzer, W., Hebbelinck, M., & Mullie, P. (2014) · Nutrients · doi:10.3390/nu6031318 · Cited by 512
Self-citationJakše, B., Jakše, B., Mis, N. F., Jug, B., Šajber, D., Godnov, U., & Čuk, I. (2021) · Journal of Nutrition and Metabolism · doi:10.1155/2021/8810548 · Cited by 21
Metadata
- Authors
- De Keyzer, W., Dekkers, A., Van Vlaslaer, V., Ottevaere, C., Van Oyen, H., De Henauw, S., & Huybrechts, I.
- Venue
- The European Journal of Public Health
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2012-07-26
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 737-742
- ISSN
- 1101-1262
- 1464-360X
- Cited by
- 26
- References
- 3
- Language
- en
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
