首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the American Dietetic Association >Comparison of 3 methods for counting fruits and vegetables for fourth-grade students in the Minnesota 5 A Day Power Plus Program (see comments)
【24h】

Comparison of 3 methods for counting fruits and vegetables for fourth-grade students in the Minnesota 5 A Day Power Plus Program (see comments)

机译:明尼苏达州5 A Day Power Plus计划中四年级学生计算水果和蔬菜的3种方法的比较(请参阅评论)

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

OBJECTIVE: To compare fruit and vegetable servings calculated from 24-hour dietary recall data using 3 methods: a counting scheme developed for the 5 A Day for Better Health study, a method developed by the University of Minnesota Cancer Prevention Research Unit to quantify total consumption of fruits and vegetables, and a counting scheme based on the US Food and Drug Administration's Reference Amounts. The counting methods differ by food items counted and by serving sizes for those items. SUBJECTS/SETTING: Record-assisted 24-hour dietary recalls were collected from 617 randomly selected fourth-grade students (317 girls, 300 boys) from 23 schools in St Paul, Minn, participating in the Minnesota 5 A Day Power Plus Program. DESIGN: The dietary recalls were analyzed using the Minnesota Nutrition Data System (version 2.6/8a/23). Total servings of fruits and vegetables, servings of vegetables, servings of fruits plus juices, servings of fruit juice, and servings of fruit excluding juice were tallied using each counting method. STATISTICAL ANALYSES: A mixed-model Poisson regression analysis was conducted to compare numbers of servings calculated using the 3 methods. RESULTS: Counts of daily total fruits and vegetables averaged 3.9 servings with the 5 A Day method, 4.1 servings using US Food and Drug Administration Reference Amounts, and 5.1 servings with the Minnesota Cancer Prevention Research Unit method (P < .0001). APPLICATIONS: Because the different counting methods yield different tallies of fruit and vegetable intake, it is important for researchers and practitioners interested in fruit and vegetable consumption to be clear about their uses of the data before choosing a counting scheme.
机译:目的:比较使用以下三种方法从24小时饮食召回数据中计算出的水果和蔬菜含量:为更好的健康5天研究开发的计数方案,明尼苏达大学癌症预防研究部门开发的用于量化总消费量的方法水果和蔬菜,以及基于美国食品和药物管理局参考量的计数方案。计数方法因所计数的食品和这些食品的份量而异。主题/背景:记录辅助的24小时饮食回忆来自于明尼苏达州圣保罗市23所学校的617名随机抽取的四年级学生(317名女孩,300名男孩),他们参加了明尼苏达州的5天全日制Power Plus计划。设计:使用明尼苏达州营养数据系统(2.6 / 8a / 23版)对饮食召回进行了分析。使用每种计数方法对水果和蔬菜的总份数,蔬菜的份数,水果和果汁的份数,果汁的份数以及除果汁以外的水果的份数进行计数。统计分析:进行了混合模型的Poisson回归分析,以比较使用3种方法计算的份数。结果:5 A Day法平均每日水果和蔬菜的平均计数为3.9份,美国食品和药物管理局参考量平均为4.1份,明尼苏达州癌症预防研究单位法为5.1份(P <.0001)。应用:由于不同的计数方法会得出不同的水果和蔬菜摄入量,因此对于对水果和蔬菜消费感兴趣的研究人员和从业人员,重要的是在选择计数方案之前明确其数据用途。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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