Monitoring Dietary Change in a Low-Fat Diet Intervention Study: Advantages of Using 24-Hour Dietary Recalls vs Food Records

• Published in: Journal of the American Dietetic Association 1996-06, Vol.96 (6), p.574-579
• Main Authors: BUZZARD, I.MARILYN, FAUCETT, CHERYL L, JEFFERY, ROBERT W, McBANE, LAURIE, McGOVERN, PAUL, BAXTER, JUDITH S, SHAPIRO, ALICE C, BLACKBURN, GEORGE L, CHLEBOWSKI, ROWAN T, ELASHOFF, ROBERT M, WYNDER, ERNST L
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Aged; Analysis of Variance; Biological and medical sciences; Diet; Diet Records; Diet, Fat-Restricted - standards; Dietary fat; Female; Health aspects; Humans; Intervention; Medical sciences; Memory; Mental Recall; Middle Aged; Monitoring, Ambulatory - methods; Nutrition Assessment; Oils & fats; Patient Compliance; Prevention and actions; Public health. Hygiene; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine; Records (Documents); Specific populations (family, woman, child, elderly...); Studies; Telephone; Time Factors
• ISSN: 0002-8223; 2212-2672; 1878-3570; 2212-2680
• DOI: 10.1016/S0002-8223(96)00158-7

Objective The purpose of the study was to evaluate two methods of dietary assessment for monitoring change in fat intake in a low-fat diet intervention study. Design The two dietary assessment methods were a 4-day food record (4DFR) and an unannounced 24-hour dietary recall conducted by telephone interview (referred to as a telephone recall [TR]). Subjects were assigned randomly to either a low-fat diet intervention group or a control group that received no counseling about fat intake. Dietary data were collected at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Subjects Two hundred ninety postmenopausal women with localized breast cancer were recruited at seven clinical centers in the United States. Statistical analysis Analysis of variance was used to test for significant differences in mean fat and energy intakes. Results Three sources of error were identified: (a) an instrument effect, suggesting underreporting at baseline of approximately 8% in mean energy intake and 11% in mean fat intake in the TR group compared with the 4DFR group ( P=.0001); (b) a repeated measures effect observed for the 4DFR, suggesting underreporting of approximately 7% for energy intake and 14% for fat intake in the control group at 6 and 12 months compared with baseline values ( P