Misclassification of coffee consumption data and the development of a standardised coffee unit measure.


Journal

BMJ nutrition, prevention & health
ISSN: 2516-5542
Titre abrégé: BMJ Nutr Prev Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101769223

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2019
Historique:
received: 26 10 2018
revised: 21 03 2019
accepted: 29 03 2019
entrez: 25 11 2020
pubmed: 2 5 2019
medline: 2 5 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Associations of coffee consumption with multiple health outcomes have been researched extensively. Coffee consumption, usually reported in cups a day, is a heterogeneous measure due to numerous preparation methods and cup sizes, leading to misclassification. This paper develops a new 'unit' measure of coffee and uses coffee consumption data from a representative sample of the UK population to assess misclassification when cup volume and preparation type are not taken into account. A coffee unit measure was created using published estimates of caffeine and chlorogenic acid concentrations, and applied across volumes and preparation types. Four-day food diary data in adults from the UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey (NDNS; 2012-2016) were used to quantify coffee intake. Participant self-reported cups a day were compared with cups a day standardised by (a) 227 mL volume and (b) 227 mL instant coffee equivalents (unit measure), and the degree of misclassification was derived. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to model coffee drinking preferences of different populations and caffeine:chlorogenic acid weighting assumptions of the unit measure. The NDNS sample consisted of 2832 adult participants. Coffee was consumed by 62% of participants. Types varied, with 75% of caffeinated coffee cups being instant, 17% filter, 3% latte, 2% cappuccino, 2% espresso and <1% other types. Comparing reported cups to volume-standardised cups, 84% of participants had correct classification, and 73% when using the coffee unit measure, 22% underestimated and 5% overestimated, largely by one cup. Misclassification varied by gender, age and income. Sensitivity analysis highlighted the benefits of using the unit measure over volume alone to cater for different populations, and stability of the unit composition assumption. Cup volume and preparation type should be taken into account, through the application of a standardised coffee unit measure, when coffee consumption is classified in future research studies.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Associations of coffee consumption with multiple health outcomes have been researched extensively. Coffee consumption, usually reported in cups a day, is a heterogeneous measure due to numerous preparation methods and cup sizes, leading to misclassification. This paper develops a new 'unit' measure of coffee and uses coffee consumption data from a representative sample of the UK population to assess misclassification when cup volume and preparation type are not taken into account.
METHODS METHODS
A coffee unit measure was created using published estimates of caffeine and chlorogenic acid concentrations, and applied across volumes and preparation types. Four-day food diary data in adults from the UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey (NDNS; 2012-2016) were used to quantify coffee intake. Participant self-reported cups a day were compared with cups a day standardised by (a) 227 mL volume and (b) 227 mL instant coffee equivalents (unit measure), and the degree of misclassification was derived. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to model coffee drinking preferences of different populations and caffeine:chlorogenic acid weighting assumptions of the unit measure.
RESULTS RESULTS
The NDNS sample consisted of 2832 adult participants. Coffee was consumed by 62% of participants. Types varied, with 75% of caffeinated coffee cups being instant, 17% filter, 3% latte, 2% cappuccino, 2% espresso and <1% other types. Comparing reported cups to volume-standardised cups, 84% of participants had correct classification, and 73% when using the coffee unit measure, 22% underestimated and 5% overestimated, largely by one cup. Misclassification varied by gender, age and income. Sensitivity analysis highlighted the benefits of using the unit measure over volume alone to cater for different populations, and stability of the unit composition assumption.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Cup volume and preparation type should be taken into account, through the application of a standardised coffee unit measure, when coffee consumption is classified in future research studies.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33235952
doi: 10.1136/bmjnph-2018-000013
pii: bmjnph-2018-000013
pmc: PMC7678482
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

11-19

Informations de copyright

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Competing interests: JP reports personal fees from Siemens Healthineers, outside the submitted work; JAF reports personal fees and other from Novartis, personal fees from Merck Sharp & Dohme, grants from GlaxoSmithKline, grants from Intercept Pharmaceuticals, personal fees from Galecto Biotech and personal fees from Gilde Healthcare, outside the submitted work.

Références

Am J Epidemiol. 1990 Oct;132(4):746-8
pubmed: 2403115
Food Funct. 2014 Aug;5(8):1695-717
pubmed: 24671262
Can Med Assoc J. 1976 Feb 7;114(3):205-8
pubmed: 1032351
Prev Med. 1988 May;17(3):280-94
pubmed: 3405985
J Agric Food Chem. 2006 Jan 25;54(2):374-81
pubmed: 16417293
BMJ. 2017 Nov 22;359:j5024
pubmed: 29167102
J Anal Toxicol. 2003 Oct;27(7):520-2
pubmed: 14607010
Food Chem Toxicol. 1997 Jun;35(6):547-54
pubmed: 9225012
J Anal Methods Chem. 2014;2014:965353
pubmed: 25587489
J Food Sci Technol. 2016 Nov;53(11):3916-3927
pubmed: 28035147
Food Funct. 2014 Aug;5(8):1718-26
pubmed: 25014672
Epidemiology. 2002 Mar;13(2):165-71
pubmed: 11880757

Auteurs

Robin Poole (R)

Primary Care and Population Sciences Academic Unit, University of Southampton Faculty of Medicine, Southampton, UK.

Sean Ewings (S)

School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.

Julie Parkes (J)

Primary Care and Population Sciences Academic Unit, University of Southampton Faculty of Medicine, Southampton, UK.

Jonathan A Fallowfield (JA)

University of Edinburgh Centre for Inflammation Research, Queen's Medical Research Institute, Edinburgh, UK.

Paul Roderick (P)

Primary Care and Population Sciences Academic Unit, University of Southampton Faculty of Medicine, Southampton, UK.

Classifications MeSH