Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 375

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Dutch EPIC food frequency questionnaire. II. Relative validity and reproducibility for nutrients

Ocke, M.·1997·International Journal of Epidemiology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A self-administered semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) was developed for the Dutch cohort of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC). METHODS: The reproducibility and relative validity of nutrient intake as assessed by this questionnaire were investigated in a population of 121 men and women. To assess the relative validity, 12 monthly 24-hour recalls served as reference method, together with four determinations of 24-hour urinary nitrogen excretion, predicted basal metabolic rate, and serum beta-carotene and alpha-tocopherol levels. RESULTS: Protein and among women, energy intake were underestimated by the questionnaire compared to urinary nitrogen excretion and the basal metabolic rate, respectively. The underestimation for protein decreased with increasing protein intake. Pearson correlation coefficients between nutrient intakes assessed by repeated questionnaires ranged from 0.70 to 0.94 among men and from 0.59 to 0.94 among women. Correlation coefficients between nutrient intakes assessed by the questionnaire and 24-hour recalls ranged from 0.26 to 0.83 for men and from 0.35 to 0.90 for women, with medians of 0.59 and 0.58, respectively. Correlation coefficients between 0.2 and 0.5 were observed for beta-carotene and vitamin C for men and for beta-carotene and vitamin E for women. Associations with serum beta-carotene (r = -0.16 for men; 0.13 for women) and alpha-tocopherol (0.23 and 0.15, respectively) were much poorer than those obtained with 24-hour recalls. Correlations between protein intake and 24-hour urinary nitrogen excretion were 0.47 and 0.53, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The FFQ seems adequate for ranking subjects according to intake of energy, macronutrients, dietary fibre and retinol, but it does not yield such good results for beta-carotene, vitamin C for men, vitamin E for women.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ije/26.suppl_1.s49

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 375

Metadata

Authors
Ocke, M.
Venue
International Journal of Epidemiology
Published
1997-02-01
Volume
26
Issue
90001
Pages
49S-58
ISSN
  • 0300-5771 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-3685
OpenAlex
W2160607602
Cited by
375
References
2
FWCI
9.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Dutch EPIC food frequency questionnaire. II. Relative validity and reproducibility for nutrients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/ije/26.suppl_1.s49
The paper
Ocke, M. (1997). The Dutch EPIC food frequency questionnaire. II. Relative validity and reproducibility for nutrients. International Journal of Epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/26.suppl_1.s49

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.