Retention Interval and Prompts: Creation and Cross-Sectional Pilot-Testing of Eight Interview Protocols to Obtain 24-Hour Dietary Recalls from Fourth-Grade Children

Abstract Background Any 24-hour dietary recall (24hDR) has a retention interval and prompts. No research has investigated their combined effect. Objective Eight 24hDR protocols, constructed by crossing two retention intervals (prior-24-hour recall obtained in afternoon and previous-day recall obtain...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics 2015-08, Vol.115 (8), p.1291-1298
Main Authors: Baxter, Suzanne D., PhD, RD, LD, FADA, FAND, Smith, Albert F., PhD, MS, Guinn, Caroline H., RD, LD, Hitchcock, David B., PhD, Puryear, Megan P., MS, RD, LD, Vaadi, Kate K., RD, LD, Finney, Christopher J., MS
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Child
Children
Cross-Sectional Studies
Diet
Dietary recall
Eating
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Food Services
Gastroenterology and Hepatology
Humans
Internal Medicine
Interview protocol
Interviews as Topic
Male
Meals
Mental Recall
Multivariate Analysis
Pilot Projects
Prompts
Retention interval
Schools
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract Background Any 24-hour dietary recall (24hDR) has a retention interval and prompts. No research has investigated their combined effect. Objective Eight 24hDR protocols, constructed by crossing two retention intervals (prior-24-hour recall obtained in afternoon and previous-day recall obtained in morning) with four prompts (forward [distant-to-recent], reverse [recent-to-distant], meal-name [eg, breakfast, lunch, etc], and open [no instructions]), were pilot-tested. Design Via a cross-sectional design, children were interviewed once, using one of eight 24hDR protocols. Participants/setting Forty-eight fourth-grade children (79% black; 50% girls; six per protocol) were randomly selected from two schools during spring 2011. Protocol assignment was random. Analyses excluded one interview due to protocol deviation. Statistical analyses performed Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) with four nonaccuracy-related response variables was conducted, with independent variables retention interval, prompt, and their interaction. The significance level was 0.10 due to the study’s exploratory nature. Results The response variable set differed across retention intervals ( P =0.0003) and prompts ( P =0.045) but not their interaction ( P =0.11). Follow-up analysis of variance for each of four variables showed differences by retention interval for three and prompt for two: Interview length (minutes) differed by retention interval (prior-24-hour-afternoon=21.8, previous-day-morning=16.1; P
ISSN:2212-2672
2212-2680
DOI:10.1016/j.jand.2014.12.010