Cited by 72Regulation of Appetite and ObesityNutrition, Health and Food BehaviorNutritional Studies and Diet

Corrective responses in human food intake identified from an analysis of 7-d food-intake records

Open access
Bray, George A, Flatt, Jean-Pierre, Volaufova, Julia, DeLany, James P, Champagne, Catherine M·2008·The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Abstract

Background We tested the hypothesis that ad libitum food intake shows corrective responses over periods of 1-5 d.Design This was a prospective study of food intake in women.Methods Two methods, a weighed food intake and a measured food intake, were used to determine daily nutrient intake during 2 wk in 20 women. Energy expenditure with the use of doubly labeled water was done contemporaneously with the weighed food-intake record. The daily deviations in macronutrient and energy intake from the average 7-d values were compared with the deviations observed 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 d later to estimate the corrective responses.Results Both methods of recording food intake gave similar patterns of macronutrient and total energy intakes and for deviations from average intakes. The intraindividual CVs for energy intake ranged from +/-12% to +/-47% with an average of +/-25%. Reported energy intake was 85.5-95.0% of total energy expenditure determined by doubly labeled water. Significant corrective responses were observed in food intakes with a 3- to 4-d lag that disappeared when data were randomized within each subject.Conclusions Human beings show corrective responses to deviations from average energy and macronutrient intakes with a lag time of 3-4 d, but not 1-2 d. This suggests that short-term studies may fail to recognize important signals of food-intake regulation that operate over several days. These corrective responses probably play a crucial role in bringing about weight stability.

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 · 10.3945/ajcn.2008.26289

Cites

41 of 41 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?

  • Previous studies found day-to-day variability in ad libitum energy intake with a standard deviation of about 500-600 kcal/d.

    “This sample size calculation was informed by previous studies measuring day to day variability of ad libitum energy intake having a standard deviation of about 500–600 kcal/d (Bray et al., 2008; Edholm et al., 1970; Tarasuk and Beaton, 1992).”

    From Ultra-Processed Diets Cause Excess Calorie Intake and Weight Gain: An Inpatient Randomized Controlled Trial of Ad Libitum Food Intake (2019) · cites this paper as Bray et al., 2008

    The Results section (page unavailable) reports substantial day-to-day variation in energy intake, and the Discussion gives an average within-person coefficient of variation of 25%. The paper does not report a standard deviation of 500–600 kcal/d; its mention of 600 kcal describes occasional deviations from a person's average, not the standard deviation. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    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

2 of the 43 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bray, G. A., Flatt, J.-P., Volaufova, J., DeLany, J. P., & Champagne, C. M.
Affiliations
Pennington Biomedical Research Center (US)
Corresponding author
Bray, George A
Venue
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-12
Volume
88
Issue
6
Pages
1504-1510
ISSN
0002-9165 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2120902008
Cited by
72
References
43
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Agriculture
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (P30DK072476)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Regulation of Appetite and Obesity
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
Keywords
food intake regulation, corrective responses, energy intake, macronutrient intake, energy expenditure, doubly labeled water, within-person variability, weight stability, women
MeSH terms
Adult, Alcohol Drinking, Body Water, Energy Intake, Deuterium, Dietary Carbohydrates, Dietary Fats, Dietary Proteins, Eating, Energy Metabolism, Female, Humans, Oxygen Isotopes, Predictive Value of Tests, Prospective Studies, Satiety Response, Time Factors, Diet Records

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