Mal J Nutr 20(2): 133 - 144, 2014

Validation of a Food Frequency Interview Schedule to Assess the Dietary Intake of the Population in Hyderabad City - A Cross-Sectional Study
Betsy A, Athe R, Rao VVM, Rao VS & Polasa K

ABSTRACT

Introduction: The food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) is the preferred method to evaluate long-term usual dietary intake in population-based epidemiological studies because it is simple, easy to administer and requires minimal effort from the subjects. Therefore, we validated a food frequency interview schedule (FFIS) to estimate the dietary intakes of the urban population of Hyderabad city.
Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among five socio-economic sections of Hyderabad. Areas for the survey were selected by cluster random sampling and households in each area were selected by simple random sampling. The FFIS was developed and validated against a 6-day 24-hour dietary recall (HDR) method. The instruments were administered to the participants six months apart to check for reproducibility. Statistical analyses for validation and reproducibility included correlation, regression analyses and paired t-test.
Results: Means of intakes of foods measured by 24-HDR were significantly lower than those measured by FFIS for some foods at alpha levels of 0.05. Pearsonís correlation (r) for the intakes by the two methods ranged from 0.12 to 0.85. Regression coefficients were significant for 12 food groups. Correlation coefficients for the two FFISs were between 0.31 (spices) and 0.81 (carbonated beverages) and showed good reproducibility. Intakes of conventional foods like cereals, pulses, vegetables etc. by FFIS correlated better with 24-HDR than the processed foods such as breakfast cereals and bakery items.
Conclusion: The data suggests that the FFIS is a well-validated, reproducible tool for assessment of long term dietary habits of a specific population. However, its use for populations of other regions requires specific modifications.

Keywords: Dietary assessment, food frequency interview, standardised recipes

Download full article

March 1995, Vol1 No.1
September 1995, Vol1 No.2
March 1996, Vol2 No.1
September 1996, Vol2 No.2
March 1997, Vol3 No.1
September 1997, Vol3 No.2
December 1998, Vol4 No.1&2
December 1999, Vol5 No.1&2
March 2000, Vol6 No.1
September 2000, Vol6 No.2
Mar/Sept 2001, Vol7 No.1&2
March 2002, Vol8, No.1
September 2002, Vol8, No.2
March 2003, Vol9 No.1
September 2003, Vol9 No.2
March 2004, Vol10 No.1
September 2004, Vol10 No. 2
2005, Vol 11 No.1
2005, Vo l11 No.2
2006, Vol 12 No.1
2006, Vol 12 No.2
2007, Vol 13 No.1
2007, Vol 13 No.2
March 2008, Vol 14 No.1
2008, Vol 14 No.2
2009, Vol 15 No.1
2009, Vol 15 No.2
2010, Vol 16(1)

2010, Vol 16(2)

2010, Vol 16(3)

2011, Vol 17(1)

2011, Vol 17(2)

2011, Vol 17(3)

2012, Vol 18(1)

2012, Vol 18(2)

2012, Vol 18(3)

2013, Vol 19(1)

2013, Vol 19(2)

2013, Vol 19(3)

2014, Vol 20(1)

2014, Vol 20(2)

2014, Vol 20(3)

2015, Vol 21(1)

2015, Vol 21(2)

2015, Vol 21(3)

2016, Vol 22(1)

2016, Vol 22(2)

2016, Vol 22 Supplement

2016, Vol 22(3)

2017, Vol 23(1)

2017, Vol 23(2)