Validation Information: FFQ (Japan)
Kato 2017
Online version of the self-administered food frequency questionnaire for the Japan Public Health Center-based Prospective Study for the Next Generation (JPHC-NEXT) protocol: Relative validity, usability, and comparison with a printed questionnaire
Background:Online dietary assessment tools offer advantages over printed questionnaires, such as the automatic and direct data storage of answers, and have the potential to become valuable research methods. We developed an online survey system (web-FFQ) for the existing printed FFQ used in the JPHC-NEXT protocol, the platform of a large-scale genetic cohort study. Here, we examined the validity of ranking individuals according to dietary intake using this web-FFQ and its usability compared with the printed questionnaire (print-FFQ) for combined usage.
Methods:It included 237 men and women aged 40-74 years from five areas specified in the JPHC-NEXT protocol. From 2012 to 2013, participants were asked to provide 12-day weighed food records (12d-WFR) as the reference intake and to respond to the print- and web-FFQs. Spearman's correlation coefficients (CCs) between estimates using the web-FFQ and 12d-WFR were calculated. Cross-classification of intakes was compared with those using the print-FFQ.
Results: Most participants (83%) answered that completing the web-FFQ was comparable to or easier than completing the printed questionnaire. The median value of CCs across energy and 53 nutrients for men and women was 0.47 (range, 0.10-0.86) and 0.46 (range, 0.16-0.69), respectively. CCs for individual nutrient intakes were closely similar to those based on the print-FFQ, irrespective of response location. Cross-classification by quintile of intake based on two FFQs was reasonably accurate for many nutrients and food groups.
Conclusions:This online survey system is a reasonably valid measure for ranking individuals by intake for many nutrients, like the printed FFQ. Mixing of two FFQs for exposure assessments in epidemiological studies appears acceptable.
Total number of nutrients validated: 53
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:
- Energy
- Fat
- Saturated Fat
- Mono-unsaturated Fat
- Poly-unsaturated Fat
- Carbohydrates
- Protein
- Sugar
- Non‐starch polysaccharides(NSP)
- Sodium
- Calcium
- Iron
- Zinc
- Retinol
- Folate
- Folic Acid
- Vitamin B12
- Vitamin C
- Fruit & Vegetables
- Urinary Nitrogen
To find information on the other validated nutrients please read the validation study.
- Energy
- Macronutrients: 7
- Micronutrients: 46
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 | Energy (kcal) | 0.98% | 0.22% | 0.42 (S) | 33 | 5 | 0.54% | 1.78% | |
Protein (g) | 0.89% | 0.23% | 0.46 (S) | 33 | 5 | 0.44% | 1.82% | ||||
Fat (g) | 0.98% | 0.32% | 0.50 (S) | 31 | 5 | 0.35% | 2.72% | ||||
Saturated Fat (g) | 1.05% | 0.35% | 0.54 (S) | 31 | 5 | 0.36% | 3.21% | ||||
MUFA (g) | 1% | 0.33% | 0.50 (S) | 27 | 5 | 0.34% | 2.95% | ||||
PUFA(g) | 0.97% | 0.28% | 0.42 (S) | 23 | 5 | 0.41% | 2.29% | ||||
Carbohydrates (g) | 0.92% | 0.19% | 0.49 (S) | 41 | 5 | 0.55% | 1.53% | ||||
Sodium (mg) | 0.87% | 0.25% | 0.41 (S) | 27 | 5 | 0.37% | 2.01% | ||||
Calcium (mg) | 0.88% | 0.27% | 0.54 (S) | 32 | 5 | 0.35% | 2.21% | ||||
Iron (mg) | 0.92% | 0.21% | 0.53 (S) | 37 | 5 | 0.51% | 1.67% | ||||
Zinc (mg) | 0.94% | 0.23% | 0.42 (S) | 29 | 5 | 0.48% | 1.85% | ||||
Retinol (µg) | 1.20% | 0.51% | 0.52 (S) | 31 | 5 | 0.19% | 7.68% | ||||
Folate (µg) | 0.76% | 0.20% | 0.59 (S) | 37 | 5 | 0.36% | 1.62% | ||||
Vitamin B12 (µg) | 0.81% | 0.26% | 0.46 (S) | 34 | 5 | 0.29% | 2.30% | ||||
Vitamin C (mg) | 0.68% | 0.23% | 0.54 (S) | 33 | 5 | 0.22% | 2.12% | ||||
Fruit (g) | 1.24% | 0.55% | 0.58 (S) | 36 | 5 | 0.14% | 11.33% | ||||
Vegetable (g) | 0.55% | 0.20% | 0.55 (S) | 33 | 5 | 0.15% | 2.04% | ||||
Weighed Food Diary | Adults | Both | Energy (kcal) | 1.10% | 0.28% | 0.18 (S) | 27 | 5 | 0.55% | 2.20% | |
Protein (g) | 1.05% | 0.30% | 0.40 (S) | 29 | 5 | 0.46% | 2.42% | ||||
Fat (g) | 1.14% | 0.37% | 0.39 (S) | 30 | 5 | 0.41% | 3.15% | ||||
Saturated Fat (g) | 1.21% | 0.40% | 0.44 (S) | 27 | 5 | 0.42% | 3.48% | ||||
MUFA (g) | 1.19% | 0.38% | 0.26 (S) | 27 | 5 | 0.43% | 3.28% | ||||
PUFA(g) | 1.14% | 0.34% | 0.20 (S) | 26 | 5 | 0.47% | 2.74% | ||||
Carbohydrates (g) | 1.05% | 0.24% | 0.51 (S) | 37 | 5 | 0.58% | 1.91% | ||||
Sodium (mg) | 1.09% | 0.35% | 0.43 (S) | 32 | 5 | 0.40% | 2.94% | ||||
Calcium (mg) | 1.14% | 0.40% | 0.52 (S) | 31 | 5 | 0.35% | 3.71% | ||||
Iron (mg) | 1.03% | 0.25% | 0.51 (S) | 39 | 5 | 0.53% | 1.99% | ||||
Zinc (mg) | 1.08% | 0.27% | 0.30 (S) | 28 | 5 | 0.55% | 2.14% | ||||
Retinol (µg) | 1.28% | 0.52% | 0.38 (S) | 29 | 5 | 0.25% | 6.62% | ||||
Folate (µg) | 0.96% | 0.28% | 0.55 (S) | 29 | 5 | 0.40% | 2.31% | ||||
Vitamin B12 (µg) | 0.99% | 0.33% | 0.61 (S) | 35 | 5 | 0.34% | 2.88% | ||||
Vitamin C (mg) | 0.99% | 0.21% | 0.57 (S) | 33 | 5 | 0.57% | 3.02% | ||||
Fruit (g) | 1.45% | 0.62% | 0.50 (S) | 32 | 5 | 0.22% | 9.73% | ||||
Vegetable (g) | 0.89% | 0.32% | 0.42 (S) | 24 | 5 | 0.26% | 3.12% |
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.
Kato E, Takachi R, Ishihara J, Ishii Y, Sasazuki S, Sawada N, et al. Online version of the self-administered food frequency questionnaire for the Japan Public Health Center-based Prospective Study for the Next Generation (JPHC-NEXT) protocol: Relative validity, usability, and comparison with a printed questionnaire. Journal of Epidemiology. 2017;27(9):435-46.