• Energy Research

To inform the interpretation of dietary data in the context of sex differences in diet-disease relations, it is important to understand whether there are any sex differences in accuracy of dietary reporting.To quantify sex differences in self-reported total energy intake (TEI) compared with a reference measure of total energy expenditure (TEE).Six electronic databases were systematically searched for published original research articles between 1980 and April 2020. Studies were included if they were conducted in adult populations with measures for both females and males of self-reported TEI and TEE from doubly labeled water (DLW). Studies were screened and quality assessed independently by 2 authors. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to pool the mean differences between TEI and TEE for, and between, females and males, by method of dietary assessment.From 1313 identified studies, 31 met the inclusion criteria. The studies collectively included information on 4518 individuals (54% females). Dietary assessment methods included 24-h recalls (n = 12, 2 with supplemental photos of food items consumed), estimated food records (EFRs; n = 11), FFQs (n = 10), weighed food records (WFRs, n = 5), and diet histories (n = 2). Meta-analyses identified underestimation of TEI by females and males, ranging from -1318 kJ/d (95% CI: -1967, -669) for FFQ to -2650 kJ/d (95% CI: -3492, -1807) for 24-h recalls for females, and from -1764 kJ/d (95% CI: -2285, -1242) for FFQ to -3438 kJ/d (95% CI: -5382, -1494) for WFR for males. There was no difference in the level of underestimation by sex, except when using EFR, for which males underestimated energy intake more than females (by 590 kJ/d, 95% CI: 35, 1,146).Substantial underestimation of TEI across a range of dietary assessment methods was identified, similar by sex. These underestimations should be considered when assessing TEI and interpreting diet-disease relations.

To inform the interpretation of dietary data in the context of sex differences in diet-disease relations, it is important to understand whether there are any sex differences in accuracy of dietary reporting.To quantify sex differences in self-reported total energy intake (TEI) compared with a reference measure of total energy expenditure (TEE).Six electronic databases were systematically searched for published original research articles between 1980 and April 2020. Studies were included if they were conducted in adult populations with measures for both females and males of self-reported TEI and TEE from doubly labeled water (DLW). Studies were screened and quality assessed independently by 2 authors. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to pool the mean differences between TEI and TEE for, and between, females and males, by method of dietary assessment.From 1313 identified studies, 31 met the inclusion criteria. The studies collectively included information on 4518 individuals (54% females). Dietary assessment methods included 24-h recalls (n = 12, 2 with supplemental photos of food items consumed), estimated food records (EFRs; n = 11), FFQs (n = 10), weighed food records (WFRs, n = 5), and diet histories (n = 2). Meta-analyses identified underestimation of TEI by females and males, ranging from -1318 kJ/d (95% CI: -1967, -669) for FFQ to -2650 kJ/d (95% CI: -3492, -1807) for 24-h recalls for females, and from -1764 kJ/d (95% CI: -2285, -1242) for FFQ to -3438 kJ/d (95% CI: -5382, -1494) for WFR for males. There was no difference in the level of underestimation by sex, except when using EFR, for which males underestimated energy intake more than females (by 590 kJ/d, 95% CI: 35, 1,146).Substantial underestimation of TEI across a range of dietary assessment methods was identified, similar by sex. These underestimations should be considered when assessing TEI and interpreting diet-disease relations.

Assessing energy intake (EI) in children and adolescents is essential for monitoring population nutrition trends and interpreting clinical outcomes. The aim of this review was to examine the validity of dietary assessment methods for estimating EI in children and adolescents when compared with total energy expenditure (TEE) measured using doubly labelled water (DLW). Six online databases were searched to identify articles published in English. Studies were included if they were conducted in participants aged ≤18 years, if they estimated EI via a dietary assessment method, and if they compared this estimate to TEE measured using the DLW method. The search strategy identified 345 articles, of which 13 articles (12 studies) (n = 306 children) met the selection criteria. Five studies were carried out in children aged 5-11 years with dietary intake of children reported by parents/caregivers. The most common dietary assessment methods used were food frequency questionnaires (n = 5) and weighed food records (n = 4). All methods were found to have some level of misreporting. Child characteristics including weight status, age, and sex were not found to consistently influence the accuracy of reported EI. Five studies employing technology-assisted approaches for assessing dietary intake in children were identified and reported mixed findings. Validity studies using DLW remain sparse in the literature. Studies including participants less than 5 years or older than 11 years, and from diverse ethnicities and socioeconomic backgrounds are warranted to explore other demographic differences that may affect the accuracy of dietary assessment methods. While reported in few studies, technology-assisted methods were found to perform equally well in estimating intakes when compared to DLW and other traditional forms of dietary assessment.

Assessing energy intake (EI) in children and adolescents is essential for monitoring population nutrition trends and interpreting clinical outcomes. The aim of this review was to examine the validity of dietary assessment methods for estimating EI in children and adolescents when compared with total energy expenditure (TEE) measured using doubly labelled water (DLW). Six online databases were searched to identify articles published in English. Studies were included if they were conducted in participants aged ≤18 years, if they estimated EI via a dietary assessment method, and if they compared this estimate to TEE measured using the DLW method. The search strategy identified 345 articles, of which 13 articles (12 studies) (n = 306 children) met the selection criteria. Five studies were carried out in children aged 5-11 years with dietary intake of children reported by parents/caregivers. The most common dietary assessment methods used were food frequency questionnaires (n = 5) and weighed food records (n = 4). All methods were found to have some level of misreporting. Child characteristics including weight status, age, and sex were not found to consistently influence the accuracy of reported EI. Five studies employing technology-assisted approaches for assessing dietary intake in children were identified and reported mixed findings. Validity studies using DLW remain sparse in the literature. Studies including participants less than 5 years or older than 11 years, and from diverse ethnicities and socioeconomic backgrounds are warranted to explore other demographic differences that may affect the accuracy of dietary assessment methods. While reported in few studies, technology-assisted methods were found to perform equally well in estimating intakes when compared to DLW and other traditional forms of dietary assessment.