Tool Library Tool Information
Validation Information: Meal-Q FFQ (Micronutrient & fibre)
Relative Validity of Micronutrient and Fiber Intake Assessed With Two New Interactive Meal- and Web-Based Food Frequency Questionnaires
The meal- and Web-based food frequency questionnaires, Meal-Q and MiniMeal-Q, were developed for cost-efficient assessment of dietary intake in epidemiological studies.
The objective of this study was to evaluate the relative validity of micronutrient and fiber intake assessed with Meal-Q and MiniMeal-Q. The reproducibility of Meal-Q was also evaluated.
A total of 163 volunteer men and women aged between 20 and 63 years were recruited from Stockholm County, Sweden. Assessment of micronutrient and fiber intake with the 174-item Meal-Q was compared to a Web-based 7-day weighed food record (WFR). Two administered Meal-Q questionnaires were compared for reproducibility. The 126-item MiniMeal-Q, developed after the validation study, was evaluated in a simulated validation by using truncated Meal-Q data.
The study population consisted of approximately 80% women (129/163) with a mean age of 33 years (SD 12) who were highly educated (130/163, 80% with >12 years of education) on average. Cross-classification of quartiles with the WFR placed 69% to 90% in the same/adjacent quartile for Meal-Q and 67% to 89% for MiniMeal-Q. Bland-Altman plots with the WFR and the questionnaires showed large variances and a trend of increasing underestimation with increasing intakes. Deattenuated and energy-adjusted Spearman rank correlations between the questionnaires and the WFR were in the range ρ=.25-.69, excluding sodium that was not statistically significant. Cross-classifications of quartiles of the 2 Meal-Q administrations placed 86% to 97% in the same/adjacent quartile. Intraclass correlation coefficients for energy-adjusted intakes were in the range of .50-.76.
With the exception of sodium, this validation study demonstrates Meal-Q and MiniMeal-Q to be useful methods for ranking micronutrient and fiber intake in epidemiological studies with Web-based data collection.
Total number of nutrients validated: 19
Not all of the nutrients validated in the validation studies are included in the table below, as statistical data was only selected to be displayed for a number of nutrients, this included:
- Saturated Fat
- Mono-unsaturated Fat
- Poly-unsaturated Fat
- Non‐starch polysaccharides(NSP)
- Folic Acid
- Vitamin B12
- Vitamin C
- Fruit & Vegetables
- Urinary Nitrogen
To find information on the other validated nutrients please read the validation study.
- Macronutrients: 1
- Micronutrients: 18
|Comparator||Lifestage||Sex||Nutrient Measured||Mean Difference||Standard Deviation||Correlation Coefficient||Cohen's Kappa Coefficient||Percentage Agreement||Percentage Agreement Categories||Lower Limits of Agreement||Upper Limits of Agreement|
|Weighed Food Diary||Adults||Both||Fibre (g)||2||0.66 (S)||-16||20|
|Sodium (mg)||-753||0.32 (S)||-2700||1238|
|Calcium (mg)||-113||0.23 (S)||-803||576|
|Iron (mg)||-1||0.44 (S)||-10||8|
|Zinc (mg)||-1||0.33 (S)||-6.5||4.4|
|Folate (µg)||-15||0.50 (S)||-245||215|
|Vitamin B12 (µg)||-2||0.39 (S)||-7.6||3.6|
|Vitamin C (mg)||-21||0.53 (S)||-142||99|
Some results have been calculated using statistical techniques based on the published data.
For further information on statistical terms click on Statistical tests used in validation studies
All correlations coefficients in the table are unadjusted unless stated otherwise. For adjusted correlation coefficients and other statistical methods used in the study e.g. paired t-tests, please read the validation articles.
- # Adjusted
- † Energy adjusted.
- ‡ For loge-transformed, energy-adjusted nutrient intakes.
- ^ Adjacent included.
- ᵟ Participants provided identical responses.
- (w) = Weighted.
Christensen SE, Moller E, Bonn SE, Ploner A, Wright A, Sjolander A, Balter O, Lissner L & Balter K. (2014) Relative Validity of Micronutrient and Fiber Intake Assessed With Two New Interactive Meal- and Web-Based Food Frequency Questionnaires.Journal of Medical Internet Research, 16 (2) e59