ARS | Publication request: VALIDATION OF NATIONAL 24-HOUR RECALL AND PHYSICAL ACTIVITY METHODOLOGY

Submitted to: Meeting Abstract
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: August 7, 2003
Publication Date: May 28, 2004
Citation: Cleveland, L., Rhodes, D., Sebastian, R., Kuczynski, K., Clemens, J., Moshfegh, A. 2004. Validation of national 24-hour recall and physical activity methodology [abstract]. XIVth International Congress of Dietetics. Available: http://www.internationaldietetics.org

Technical Abstract: AIMS: The USDA Doubly Labeled Water (DLW) Study seeks to validate two instruments used in the premier national health survey in the U.S., the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). These are the USDA Automated Multiple Pass Method (AMPM), for collecting dietary data, and a physical activity questionnaire. It is essential to identify measurement error the instruments may introduce, especially with the growing obesity epidemic in the U.S. METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS: The DLW Study seeks to validate the AMPM and the physical activity questionnaire on 520 adults. Energy intake (EI) determined from 3 24-hour recalls was compared with total energy expenditure (TEE) obtained from the DLW method over a 14-day period. In addition to TEE, resting energy expenditure (REE) was collected by respiratory exchange, and physical activity was assessed by the CSA Actigraph. Data collection was conducted over a 15-month period in 2002-2003. Data on TEE and REE are compared to EI for 23 individuals. Mean TEE was 2142 kcal for women and 2730 kcal for men. Mean daily REE was 1273 kcal for women and 1579 kcal for men. Mean daily EI was 2218 for women and 2770 for men. Comparison of mean TEE to EI by gender or BMI categories resulted in no significant difference. Men were more likely than women to report energy intakes comparable (within 15%) to their energy expenditure. CONCLUSIONS: Results signal that the AMPM is effective for collecting accurate dietary intakes for groups, its intended use in national surveys. Further research is needed to identify reasons why EI and TEE are not comparable for certain individuals.