uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Comparison between an optical readable food record and an open-ended weighed record
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Food, Nutrition and Dietetics.
2008 (English)Conference paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Comparison between an optical readable food record and an open-ended weighed record

M Nydah1 l , I-B Gustafsson2, R Mohsen3, W Becker4

1 Department of Domestic Sciences, Uppsala university, Uppsala Sweden 2. Department of Restaurant and Culinary Arts, University of Örebro, Örebro, Sweden. 3. Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences/Geriatrics, Uppsala university, Uppsala, Sweden

4 National Food Administration, Uppsala, Sweden

Background: A simplified optically readable food record (ORFR) was developed and  compared with an open-ended weighed record (WR). Objective: To compare dietary intake data obtained by a 7-day ORFR with those obtained by a 7-day WR. The results were validated against 24-h urinary nitrogen excretion and EI/estimated BMR cut-off values. Design: The study comprised 73 free-living, healthy 70-year-old men from a large cohort study. Dietary data were collected during 7 consecutive days, starting either with WR or ORFR. Results: Average intakes of milk, cheese and other milk products as well as coffee, tea and alcohol were significantly higher by ORFR than by WR, while intakes of vegetables, meat and meat products, fish, bread and cereal products as well as a number of sweet foods were significantly lower by ORFR than WR. Protein intake obtained by ORFR was 31% lower than the values calculated from the 24-h urine nitrogen excretion, and 22% lower than those obtained from WR. Average intakes of energy and several nutrients were significantly lower with ORFR than by WR. However, when adjusted to nutrient density, only a few nutrients were still lower with ORFR. A large proportion of the subjects under-reported their energy intakes, with a higher proportion for ORFR. Conclusion: Adjustments of some portion sizes in ORFR are suggested. In view of the advantages with respect to lower response burden and rapid processing of data these improvements would make ORFR a suitable dietary assessment tool in dietary surveys, especially in larger resource demanding, epidemiological investigations.



Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-100218OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-100218DiVA: diva2:209754
9th Nordic Nu-trition Conference, Copenhagen, 2008-06-02Available from: 2009-07-31 Created: 2009-03-27 Last updated: 2010-01-13Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

By organisation
Department of Food, Nutrition and Dietetics

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Total: 279 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link