A Semi-quantitative Food Frequency Questionnaire Has Relative Validity to Identify Groups of NOVA Food Classification System Among Mexican Adults.
24 h dietary recall
NOVA food classification system
adult population
food frequency questionnaire
relative validity
Journal
Frontiers in nutrition
ISSN: 2296-861X
Titre abrégé: Front Nutr
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101642264
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
06
07
2021
accepted:
05
01
2022
entrez:
21
2
2022
pubmed:
22
2
2022
medline:
22
2
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Ultra-processed foods are recognized as indicators of an unhealthy diet in epidemiological studies. In addition to ultra-processed foods, the NOVA food classification system identifies three other groups with less processing. Unprocessed foods that, together with minimally processed foods (MPF), make NOVA group 1, NOVA group 2 is processed culinary ingredients, and NOVA group 3 is processed foods. To assess the relative validity of the semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire (SFFQ) to estimate the energy intake for each group NOVA classification system by comparing it with two 24 h-dietary-recall (24DRs) Mexican adults. We analyzed dietary information from 226 adults included <60 and ≥60 years with complete SFFQ and two 24DRs from the National Health and Nutrition Survey 2012. We reported mean differences, Spearman correlation coefficients, intra-class correlations coefficients, Bland-Altman plots, and weighted kappa between measures. The percentage energy intake from unprocessed and minimally processed foods group, Spearman correlation coefficients was 0.54 in adults <60 years and 0.42 in adults ≥60 years, while ultra-processed foods group was 0.67 and 0.48, respectively. The intra-class correlation coefficients in the unprocessed and minimally processed foods group was 0.51 in adults <60 years and 0.46 in adults ≥60 years, and for the ultra-processed foods group were 0.71 and 0.50, respectively. Bland-Altman plots indicated reasonably consistent agreement for unprocessed and minimally processed foods group and ultra-processed foods group in adults <60 years and adults in the ≥60 age group. Weighted kappa was 0.45 in the ultra-processed foods group to adults <60 years and was 0.36-≥60 years. The SFFQ had acceptable validity to rank the percentage of energy intake from unprocessed and minimally processed foods group and ultra-processed foods group in Mexican adults, both in adults under 60 years and who were 60 years old or older.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Ultra-processed foods are recognized as indicators of an unhealthy diet in epidemiological studies. In addition to ultra-processed foods, the NOVA food classification system identifies three other groups with less processing. Unprocessed foods that, together with minimally processed foods (MPF), make NOVA group 1, NOVA group 2 is processed culinary ingredients, and NOVA group 3 is processed foods.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
To assess the relative validity of the semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire (SFFQ) to estimate the energy intake for each group NOVA classification system by comparing it with two 24 h-dietary-recall (24DRs) Mexican adults.
METHODS
METHODS
We analyzed dietary information from 226 adults included <60 and ≥60 years with complete SFFQ and two 24DRs from the National Health and Nutrition Survey 2012. We reported mean differences, Spearman correlation coefficients, intra-class correlations coefficients, Bland-Altman plots, and weighted kappa between measures.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The percentage energy intake from unprocessed and minimally processed foods group, Spearman correlation coefficients was 0.54 in adults <60 years and 0.42 in adults ≥60 years, while ultra-processed foods group was 0.67 and 0.48, respectively. The intra-class correlation coefficients in the unprocessed and minimally processed foods group was 0.51 in adults <60 years and 0.46 in adults ≥60 years, and for the ultra-processed foods group were 0.71 and 0.50, respectively. Bland-Altman plots indicated reasonably consistent agreement for unprocessed and minimally processed foods group and ultra-processed foods group in adults <60 years and adults in the ≥60 age group. Weighted kappa was 0.45 in the ultra-processed foods group to adults <60 years and was 0.36-≥60 years.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The SFFQ had acceptable validity to rank the percentage of energy intake from unprocessed and minimally processed foods group and ultra-processed foods group in Mexican adults, both in adults under 60 years and who were 60 years old or older.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35187027
doi: 10.3389/fnut.2022.737432
pmc: PMC8850985
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
737432Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Oviedo-Solís, Monterrubio-Flores, Rodríguez-Ramírez, Cediel, Denova-Gutiérrez and Barquera.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Salud Publica Mex. 2016 Nov-Dec;58(6):617-628
pubmed: 28225938
Cell Metab. 2019 Jul 2;30(1):67-77.e3
pubmed: 31105044
Nutr Hosp. 2018 Feb 16;35(2):408-415
pubmed: 29756976
Appetite. 2017 Jan 1;108:512-520
pubmed: 27825941
J Acad Nutr Diet. 2021 Nov 9;:
pubmed: 34763139
Nutrients. 2018 May 09;10(5):
pubmed: 29747447
J Acad Nutr Diet. 2019 Nov;119(11):1852-1865
pubmed: 31262695
Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159-74
pubmed: 843571
Obes Rev. 2021 Mar;22(3):e13146
pubmed: 33167080
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2002 May;56 Suppl 2:S25-32
pubmed: 12082515
Public Health Nutr. 2019 Apr;22(5):936-941
pubmed: 30744710
Salud Publica Mex. 2009;51 Suppl 4:S645-56
pubmed: 20464241
Salud Publica Mex. 2009;51 Suppl 4:S523-9
pubmed: 20464228
Salud Publica Mex. 1998 Mar-Apr;40(2):133-40
pubmed: 9617194
Nutrients. 2020 Jun 30;12(7):
pubmed: 32630022
Public Health Nutr. 2011 Jan;14(1):5-13
pubmed: 21211100
J Nutr. 2016 Sep;146(9):1856S-65S
pubmed: 27511932
Salud Publica Mex. 2016 Nov-Dec;58(6):608-616
pubmed: 28225937
Public Health Nutr. 2013 Dec;16(12):2240-8
pubmed: 23171687
Public Health Nutr. 2018 Jan;21(1):125-133
pubmed: 28625223
Salud Publica Mex. 2017 May-Jun;59(3):285-298
pubmed: 28902316
Rev Saude Publica. 2015;49:38
pubmed: 26176747
Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2020 Sep;71(6):678-692
pubmed: 32053758
Salud Publica Mex. 2020 Sep-Oct;62(5):521-531
pubmed: 33027862
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2009 Feb;63 Suppl 1:S69-74
pubmed: 19190649
J Hum Nutr Diet. 2015 Feb;28(1):37-46
pubmed: 24527882
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2009 Feb;63 Suppl 1:S33-7
pubmed: 19190641
Public Health Nutr. 2018 Jan;21(1):94-102
pubmed: 28714425
Salud Publica Mex. 2013;55 Suppl 2:S332-40
pubmed: 24626712
Rev Saude Publica. 2015;49:45
pubmed: 26270019
Salud Publica Mex. 2016 Nov-Dec;58(6):629-638
pubmed: 28225939
J Am Diet Assoc. 2005 May;105(5):775-89
pubmed: 15883556
Popul Health Metr. 2017 Feb 14;15(1):6
pubmed: 28193285
Nutrients. 2019 Jun 07;11(6):
pubmed: 31181631
Public Health Nutr. 2018 Jan;21(1):27-37
pubmed: 28703085
Public Health Nutr. 2021 Aug;24(11):3399-3418
pubmed: 32772982
Salud Publica Mex. 2016 Nov-Dec;58(6):602-605
pubmed: 28225935