首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Nutrients >Minimum Dietary Diversity for Women of Reproductive Age (MDD-W) Data Collection: Validity of the List-Based and Open Recall Methods as Compared to Weighed Food Record
【2h】

Minimum Dietary Diversity for Women of Reproductive Age (MDD-W) Data Collection: Validity of the List-Based and Open Recall Methods as Compared to Weighed Food Record

机译:生殖年龄妇女的最低饮食多样性(MDD-W)数据收集:与称重食品记录相比基于清单和公开召回方法的有效性

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Minimum dietary diversity for women of reproductive age (MDD-W) was validated as a population-level proxy of micronutrient adequacy, with indicator data collection proposed as either list-based or open recall. No study has assessed the validity of these two non-quantitative proxy methods against weighed food records (WFR). We assessed the measurement agreement of list-based and open recall methods as compared to WFR (i.e., reference method of individual quantitative dietary assessment) for achieving MDD-W and an ordinal food group diversity score. Applying a non-inferiority design, data were collected from non-pregnant women of reproductive age in Cambodia ( = 430), Ethiopia ( = 431), and Zambia ( = 476). For the pooled sample ( = 1337), proportions achieving MDD-W from both proxy methods were compared to WFR proportion by McNemar’s chi-square tests, Cohen’s kappa, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Ordinal food group diversity (0–10) was compared by Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank tests, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), and weighted kappa. MDD-W food groups that were most frequently misreported (i.e., type I and II errors) by the proxy methods were determined. Our findings indicate statistically significant differences in proportions achieving MDD-W, ordinal food group diversity scores, and ROC curves between both proxy methods and WFR ( < 0.001). List-based and open recall methods overreported women achieving MDD-W by 16 and 10 percentage points, respectively, as compared to WFR (proportion achieving MDD-W: 30%). ICC values between list-based or open recall and WFR were 0.50 and 0.55, respectively. Simple and weighted kappa values both indicated moderate agreement between list-based or open recall against WFR. Food groups most likely to be misreported using proxy methods were beans and peas, dark green leafy vegetables, vitamin A-rich fruit and vegetables, and other fruits. Our study provides statistical evidence for overreporting of both list-based and open recall methods for assessing prevalence of MDD-W or ordinal food group diversity score in women of reproductive age in low- and middle-income countries. Operationalizing MDD-W through qualitative recall methods should consider potential trade-offs between accuracy and simplicity.
机译:生殖年龄(MDD-W)的最低饮食多样性被验证为微量营养素充足性的人口级代理,其中指标数据收集拟议为基于清单或开放的召回。没有研究评估了这两种非定量代理方法对称重的食物记录(WFR)的有效性。与WFR(即,个人定量饮食评估的参考方法)评估了基于清单和开放式召回方法的测量协议,用于实现MDD-W和序单组分集分数。应用非较低设计,从柬埔寨的生殖年龄的非孕妇(= 430),埃塞俄比亚(= 431)和赞比亚(= 476)中收集数据。对于汇集的样本(= 1337),将实现MDD-W的比例与McNemar的Chi-Square测试,Cohen的Kappa和接收机操作特征(ROC)分析的WFR比例进行比较。通过Wilcoxon匹配对符号秩检验,脑内相关系数(ICC)和加权Kappa来比较序单食品组多样性(0-10)。确定了代理方法最常误报(即型I和II错误)的MDD-W食物组。我们的研究结果表明,达到MDD-W,序序食品组分比分数的比例和ROC曲线在统计上显着差异,以及两种代理方法和WFR之间的ROC曲线(<0.001)。与WFR(达到MDD-W:30%的比例)相比,基于名单和开放式召回方法分别以16和10个百分点的分别实现16和10个百分点。列表基于或打开召回和WFR之间的ICC值分别为0.50和0.55。简单和加权的Kappa值都指示基于列表或打开WFR的打开召回之间的中等协议。食物团体最有可能使用代理方法误报是豆类和豌豆,深绿色的叶茂蔬菜,维生素A丰富的水果和蔬菜等水果。我们的研究提供了用于评估低收入和中等收入国家的生殖年龄妇女的MDD-W或序数食品组分分量普遍评估的基于列表和开放的召回方法的统计证据。通过定性召回方法操作MDD-W应考虑精度和简单性之间的潜在权衡。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号