The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

DIET@NET: Best practice guidelines for dietary assessment in health research

DIET@NET: Best practice guidelines for dietary assessment in health research
DIET@NET: Best practice guidelines for dietary assessment in health research

Background:

Dietary assessment is complex, and strategies to select the most appropriate dietary assessment tool (DAT) in epidemiological research are needed. The DIETary Assessment Tool NETwork (DIET@NET) aimed to establish expert consensus on Best Practice Guidelines (BPGs) for dietary assessment using self-report.

Methods:

The BPGs were developed using the Delphi technique. Two Delphi rounds were conducted. A total of 131 experts were invited, and of these 65 accepted, with 48 completing Delphi round I and 51 completing Delphi round II. In all, a total of 57 experts from North America, Europe, Asia and Australia commented on the 47 suggested guidelines.

Results:

Forty-three guidelines were generated, grouped into the following four stages: Stage I. Define what is to be measured in terms of dietary intake (what? who? and when?); Stage II. Investigate different types of DATs; Stage III. Evaluate existing tools to select the most appropriate DAT by evaluating published validation studies; Stage IV. Think through the implementation of the chosen DAT and consider sources of potential biases.

Conclusions:

The Delphi technique consolidated expert views on best practice in assessing dietary intake. The BPGs provide a valuable guide for health researchers to choose the most appropriate dietary assessment method for their studies. These guidelines will be accessible through the Nutritools website, www.nutritools.org.
Cade, Janet E.
00e4216f-a895-4f13-996a-593a5c597e69
Warthon-Medina, Marisol
1269e1f1-00a6-43a2-850b-d68becff9e55
Albar, Salwa
4153e623-9193-41b4-a3e5-325bd23bf3a3
Alwan, Nisreen A.
0d37b320-f325-4ed3-ba51-0fe2866d5382
Ness, Andy
f2c5a91e-f051-46b7-af87-d51e41f9126f
Roe, Mark
f82cec9c-f240-4646-989f-e95569c0bd6d
Wark, Petra A.
3635cfce-616f-41c0-ae34-d5f3c08d3141
Greatehead, Katherine
d575185d-bd26-4663-b9cb-3a41a76c5cb3
Burley, Victoria J.
54a77495-8164-42b8-8ed7-05bfd2231124
Finglas, Paul
23d19bc0-7348-4e31-af95-8885b884810f
Johnson, Laura
4395b3c3-31bb-4818-ab47-09c6869c03e4
Page, Polly
557ff6f0-650d-4987-93c4-2f7b317998f3
Roberts, Katherine
42d378ef-9cc9-4f78-9347-891aca2365c4
Steer, Toni
62607549-c442-4a5b-83c7-5b4c37262795
Hooson, Jozef
050e983c-f9f2-493e-9c53-bbd63fb0bc44
Greenwood, Darren C.
fc525ea6-47d0-4c66-b06c-9b6b1b0a6011
Robinson, Sian
ba591c98-4380-456a-be8a-c452f992b69b
Cade, Janet E.
00e4216f-a895-4f13-996a-593a5c597e69
Warthon-Medina, Marisol
1269e1f1-00a6-43a2-850b-d68becff9e55
Albar, Salwa
4153e623-9193-41b4-a3e5-325bd23bf3a3
Alwan, Nisreen A.
0d37b320-f325-4ed3-ba51-0fe2866d5382
Ness, Andy
f2c5a91e-f051-46b7-af87-d51e41f9126f
Roe, Mark
f82cec9c-f240-4646-989f-e95569c0bd6d
Wark, Petra A.
3635cfce-616f-41c0-ae34-d5f3c08d3141
Greatehead, Katherine
d575185d-bd26-4663-b9cb-3a41a76c5cb3
Burley, Victoria J.
54a77495-8164-42b8-8ed7-05bfd2231124
Finglas, Paul
23d19bc0-7348-4e31-af95-8885b884810f
Johnson, Laura
4395b3c3-31bb-4818-ab47-09c6869c03e4
Page, Polly
557ff6f0-650d-4987-93c4-2f7b317998f3
Roberts, Katherine
42d378ef-9cc9-4f78-9347-891aca2365c4
Steer, Toni
62607549-c442-4a5b-83c7-5b4c37262795
Hooson, Jozef
050e983c-f9f2-493e-9c53-bbd63fb0bc44
Greenwood, Darren C.
fc525ea6-47d0-4c66-b06c-9b6b1b0a6011
Robinson, Sian
ba591c98-4380-456a-be8a-c452f992b69b

Cade, Janet E., Warthon-Medina, Marisol, Albar, Salwa, Alwan, Nisreen A., Ness, Andy, Roe, Mark, Wark, Petra A., Greatehead, Katherine, Burley, Victoria J., Finglas, Paul, Johnson, Laura, Page, Polly, Roberts, Katherine, Steer, Toni, Hooson, Jozef, Greenwood, Darren C. and Robinson, Sian (2017) DIET@NET: Best practice guidelines for dietary assessment in health research BMC Medicine, 15, (202) (doi:10.1186/s12916-017-0962-x).

Record type: Article

Abstract


Background:

Dietary assessment is complex, and strategies to select the most appropriate dietary assessment tool (DAT) in epidemiological research are needed. The DIETary Assessment Tool NETwork (DIET@NET) aimed to establish expert consensus on Best Practice Guidelines (BPGs) for dietary assessment using self-report.

Methods:

The BPGs were developed using the Delphi technique. Two Delphi rounds were conducted. A total of 131 experts were invited, and of these 65 accepted, with 48 completing Delphi round I and 51 completing Delphi round II. In all, a total of 57 experts from North America, Europe, Asia and Australia commented on the 47 suggested guidelines.

Results:

Forty-three guidelines were generated, grouped into the following four stages: Stage I. Define what is to be measured in terms of dietary intake (what? who? and when?); Stage II. Investigate different types of DATs; Stage III. Evaluate existing tools to select the most appropriate DAT by evaluating published validation studies; Stage IV. Think through the implementation of the chosen DAT and consider sources of potential biases.

Conclusions:

The Delphi technique consolidated expert views on best practice in assessing dietary intake. The BPGs provide a valuable guide for health researchers to choose the most appropriate dietary assessment method for their studies. These guidelines will be accessible through the Nutritools website, www.nutritools.org.

Text BPG accepted_BMC med 19 10 17 - Accepted Manuscript
Restricted to Repository staff only until 19 January 2018.
Text 2017_BPG_DIET_NET_BMC_Med - Version of Record
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (1MB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 19 October 2017
e-pub ahead of print date: 15 November 2017

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 415592
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/415592
PURE UUID: 2f42dd72-a14e-4ba3-a160-faf967f452cb
ORCID for Nisreen A. Alwan: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-4134-8463
ORCID for Sian Robinson: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-1766-7269

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 15 Nov 2017 17:30
Last modified: 15 Nov 2017 17:30

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Janet E. Cade
Author: Marisol Warthon-Medina
Author: Salwa Albar
Author: Andy Ness
Author: Mark Roe
Author: Petra A. Wark
Author: Katherine Greatehead
Author: Victoria J. Burley
Author: Paul Finglas
Author: Laura Johnson
Author: Polly Page
Author: Katherine Roberts
Author: Toni Steer
Author: Jozef Hooson
Author: Darren C. Greenwood
Author: Sian Robinson ORCID iD

University divisions

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×