Search

Due to changing recommendations for fruit and vegetable (F/V) intake, public health and private organizations recognized the need to revise communications and programs that promote F/V consumption. This article describes formative research conducted in 2005 to develop a new identity for the 5 A Day Program, updated to the Fruits & Veggies--More Matters program. The objective was to re-brand the 5 A Day Program's campaign message to be adaptable, sustainable, and compelling, while leveraging the program's existing message dissemination infrastructure. Formative research included interviews with representatives from government, nonprofit organizations, and industry, and consumer perspectives from interviews, focus groups, and an online survey. Public health and private organizations agreed that a compelling emotional benefit was needed to motivate consumers to eat more F/V and that messaging needed to be used consistently among national, state, and local programs. Interviews and focus groups targeted mothers who believed they and their families were getting enough F/V, knew they could eat more, but needed to be convinced why they should do so. The most effective messages appealed to mothers' emotional needs to be responsible, leveraged functional intrinsic values of F/V, did not try to quantify "enough," and focused on small steps. When the Fruits & Veggies-More Matters slogan and graphic were viewed together, the majority (62%) said it increased their interest in eating more F/V. The Fruits & Veggies-More Matters brand offers numerous opportunities for promoting F/V consumption through this public health initiative., (Copyright © 2011 American Dietetic Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Children's dietary intake is a key variable in evaluations of school-based interventions. Current methods for assessing children's intake, such as 24-hour recalls and meal observations, are time- and resource-intensive. As part of a study to evaluate the impact of farm-to-school programs, the school lunch recall was developed from a need for a valid and efficient tool to assess school lunch intake among large samples of children. A self-administered paper-and-pencil questionnaire, the school lunch recall prompts for school lunch items by asking children whether they chose a menu item, how much of it they ate, how much they liked it, and whether they would choose it again. The school lunch recall was validated during summer school in 2008 with 18 third- to fifth-grade students (8 to 11 years old) in a North Carolina elementary school. For 4 consecutive days, trained observers recorded foods and amounts students ate during school lunch. Students completed the school lunch recall immediately after lunch. Thirty-seven total observation school lunch recall sets were analyzed. Comparison of school lunch recalls against observations indicated high accuracy, with means of 6% for omission rate (items observed but unreported), 10% for intrusion rate (items unobserved but reported), and 0.63 servings for total inaccuracy (a measure that combines errors for reporting items and amounts). For amounts, accuracy was high for matches (0.06 and 0.01 servings for absolute and arithmetic differences, respectively) but lower for omissions (0.47 servings) and intrusions (0.54 servings). In this pilot study, the school lunch recall was a valid, efficient tool for assessing school lunch intake for a small sample of third- to fifth-grade students., (Copyright © 2011 American Dietetic Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Accurate information about children's intake is crucial for national nutrition policy and for research and clinical activities. To analyze accuracy for reporting energy and nutrients, most validation studies utilize the "conventional approach," which was not designed to capture errors of reported foods and amounts. The "reporting-error-sensitive approach" captures errors of reported foods and amounts., Objective: To extend results to energy and macronutrients for a validation study concerning retention interval (elapsed time between to-be-reported meals and the interview) and accuracy for reporting school-meal intake, the conventional and reporting-error-sensitive approaches were compared. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: Fourth-grade children (n=374) were observed eating two school meals, and interviewed to obtain a 24-hour recall using one of six interview conditions from crossing two target periods (prior 24 hours and previous day) with three interview times (morning, afternoon, and evening). Data were collected in one district during three school years (2004-2005, 2005-2006, and 2006-2007)., Main Outcome Measures: Report rates (reported/observed), correspondence rates (correctly reported/observed), and inflation ratios (intruded/observed) were calculated for energy and macronutrients., Statistical Analyses Performed: For each outcome measure, mixed-model analysis of variance was conducted with target period, interview time, their interaction, and sex in the model; results were adjusted for school year and interviewer., Results: With the conventional approach, report rates for energy and macronutrients did not differ by target period, interview time, their interaction, or sex. With the reporting-error-sensitive approach, correspondence rates for energy and macronutrients differed by target period (four P values <0.0001) and the target period by interview-time interaction (four P values <0.0001); inflation ratios for energy and macronutrients differed by target period (four P values <0.0001), and inflation ratios for energy and carbohydrate differed by the target period by interview-time interaction (both P values <0.005)., Conclusions: Shortening the retention interval of dietary recalls increases accuracy for reporting energy and macronutrients. For validation studies, it is best to obtain reference information from a method that provides details about foods and amounts consumed and to use an analytic approach that captures errors of reported foods and amounts., (2010 American Dietetic Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: For a 24-hour dietary recall, two possible target periods are the prior 24 hours (24 hours immediately preceding the interview time) and previous day (midnight to midnight of the day before the interview), and three possible interview times are morning, afternoon, and evening. Target period and interview time determine the retention interval (elapsed time between to-be-reported meals and the interview), which, along with intervening meals, can influence reporting accuracy., Objective: The effects of target period and interview time on children's accuracy for reporting school meals during 24-hour dietary recalls were investigated. DESIGN AND SUBJECTS/SETTING: During the 2004-2005, 2005-2006, and 2006-2007 school years in Columbia, SC, each of 374 randomly selected fourth-grade children (96% African American) was observed eating two consecutive school meals (breakfast and lunch) and interviewed to obtain a 24-hour dietary recall using one of six conditions defined by crossing two target periods with three interview times. Each condition had 62 or 64 children (half boys)., Main Outcome Measures: Accuracy for reporting school meals was quantified by calculating rates for omissions (food items observed eaten but unreported) and intrusions (food items reported eaten but unobserved); a measure of total inaccuracy combined errors for reporting food items and amounts., Statistical Analyses Performed: For each accuracy measure, analysis of variance was conducted with target period, interview time, their interaction, sex, interviewer, and school year in the model., Results: There was a target-period effect and a target-period by interview-time interaction on omission rates, intrusion rates, and total inaccuracy (six P values <0.004). For prior-24-hour recalls compared to previous-day recalls, and for prior-24-hour recalls in the afternoon and evening compared to previous-day recalls in the afternoon and evening, omission rates were better by one third, intrusion rates were better by one half, and total inaccuracy was better by one third., Conclusions: To enhance children's dietary recall accuracy, target periods and interview times that minimize the retention interval should be chosen.

Background: Intrusions in dietary recalls may originate in confusion of episodic memories manifested as temporal dating errors., Objective: Data from a validation study (concerning reporting accuracy over multiple recalls) and school foodservice production records were used to investigate origins of intrusions in school meals in children's 24-hour recalls. DESIGN/SUBJECTS/SETTING: During the 1999-2000 school year, 104 fourth-grade children were observed eating school meals on 1 to 3 nonconsecutive days separated by >or=25 days, and interviewed about the previous day's intake in the morning on the day after each observation day., Statistical Analyses Performed: For breakfast and lunch separately, logistic regression was used to investigate the effect of time (ie, days) before the interview day on the probability that intrusions referred to items available in the school foodservice environment. Exploratory analyses were conducted for breakfast options observed and/or reported eaten., Results: For interviews in which reported meals met criteria to be considered school meals and that contained intrusions, of 634 and 699 items reported eaten at breakfast and lunch, respectively, 394 and 331 were intrusions. Availability in the school foodservice environment of items referred to by intrusions in reports of lunch, but not breakfast, decreased as days increased before the interview day (P=0.031 and P=0.285, respectively). Concerning breakfast, children observed eating a cold option (ie, ready-to-eat cereal, milk, juice, crackers [graham or animal]) almost always reported a cold option, whereas children observed eating a hot option (ie, non-ready-to-eat cereal entrée [eg, sausage biscuit], milk, and fruit or juice) reported a cold option in approximately 50% of interviews., Conclusions: In children's 24-hour recalls, confusion of episodic memories contributes to intrusions in school lunch, and generic dietary information (eg, cold option items available daily) or confusion of episodic memories may contribute to intrusions in school breakfast. Understanding the origins of intrusions may help in developing interview methods to decrease the occurrence of intrusions.

Objective: Validation study data are used to illustrate that conclusions about children's reporting accuracy for energy and macronutrients over multiple interviews (ie, time) depend on the analytic approach for comparing reported and reference information-conventional, which disregards accuracy of reported items and amounts, or reporting-error-sensitive, which classifies reported items as matches (eaten) or intrusions (not eaten), and amounts as corresponding or overreported., Subjects and Design: Children were observed eating school meals on 1 day (n=12), or 2 (n=13) or 3 (n=79) nonconsecutive days separated by >or=25 days, and interviewed in the morning after each observation day about intake the previous day. Reference (observed) and reported information were transformed to energy and macronutrients (ie, protein, carbohydrate, and fat), and compared., Main Outcome Measures: For energy and each macronutrient: report rates (reported/reference), correspondence rates (genuine accuracy measures), and inflation ratios (error measures)., Statistical Analyses: Mixed-model analyses., Results: Using the conventional approach for analyzing energy and macronutrients, report rates did not vary systematically over interviews (all four P values >0.61). Using the reporting-error-sensitive approach for analyzing energy and macronutrients, correspondence rates increased over interviews (all four P values <0.04), indicating that reporting accuracy improved over time; inflation ratios decreased, although not significantly, over interviews, also suggesting that reporting accuracy improved over time. Correspondence rates were lower than report rates, indicating that reporting accuracy was worse than implied by conventional measures., Conclusions: When analyzed using the reporting-error-sensitive approach, children's dietary reporting accuracy for energy and macronutrients improved over time, but the conventional approach masked improvements and overestimated accuracy. The reporting-error-sensitive approach is recommended when analyzing data from validation studies of dietary reporting accuracy for energy and macronutrients.

This pilot study investigated body mass index (BMI; calculated as kg/m(2)), sex, interview protocol, and children's accuracy for reporting kilocalories. Forty 4th-grade children (20 low-BMI: >or=5th and <50th percentiles, 10 boys, 15 African American; 20 high-BMI: >or=85th percentile, 10 boys, 15 African American) were observed eating school meals (breakfast, lunch) and interviewed either that evening about the prior 24 hours or the next morning about the previous day, with 10 low-BMI (5 boys) and 10 high-BMI (5 boys) children per interview protocol. Five kilocalorie variables were analyzed using separate four-factor (BMI group, sex, race, interview protocol) analyses of variance. No effects were found for reported or matched kilocalories. More kilocalories were observed (P<0.02) and omitted (P<0.05) by high-BMI than low-BMI children. For intruded kilocalories, means were smaller (better) for high-BMI girls than high-BMI boys, but larger for low-BMI girls than low-BMI boys (interaction P<0.04); low-BMI girls intruded the most while high-BMI girls intruded the least. For interview protocol, omitted and intruded kilocalories were higher (worse), although not significantly so (P values <0.11), for interviews about the previous day than the prior 24 hours. These results illuminate relations of BMI, sex, interview protocol, and children's reporting accuracy, and are consistent with results concerning BMI and sex from studies with adults.

Quality control is an important aspect of a study because the quality of data collected provides a foundation for the conclusions drawn from the study. For studies that include interviews, establishing quality control for interviews is critical in ascertaining whether interviews are conducted according to protocol. Despite the importance of quality control for interviews, few studies adequately document the quality control procedures used during data collection. This article reviews quality control for interviews and describes methods and results of quality control for interviews from two of our studies regarding the accuracy of children's dietary recalls; the focus is on quality control regarding interviewer performance during the interview, and examples are provided from studies with children. For our two studies, every interview was audio recorded and transcribed. The audio recording and typed transcript from one interview conducted by each research dietitian either weekly or daily were randomly selected and reviewed by another research dietitian, who completed a standardized quality control for interviews checklist.Major strengths of the methods of quality control for interviews in our two studies include: (a) interviews obtained for data collection were randomly selected for quality control for interviews, and (b) quality control for interviews was assessed on a regular basis throughout data collection. The methods of quality control for interviews described may help researchers design appropriate methods of quality control for interviews for future studies.

This article (a) provides a general review of interobserver reliability (IOR) and (b) describes our method for assessing IOR for items and amounts consumed during school meals for a series of studies regarding the accuracy of fourth-grade children's dietary recalls validated with direct observation of school meals. A widely used validation method for dietary assessment is direct observation of meals. Although many studies utilize several people to conduct direct observations, few published studies indicate whether IOR was assessed. Assessment of IOR is necessary to determine that the information collected does not depend on who conducted the observation. Two strengths of our method for assessing IOR are that IOR was assessed regularly throughout the data collection period and that IOR was assessed for foods at the item and amount level instead of at the nutrient level. Adequate agreement among observers is essential to the reasoning behind using observation as a validation tool. Readers are encouraged to question the results of studies that fail to mention and/or to include the results for assessment of IOR when multiple people have conducted observations.

Objective: To determine the accuracy and consistency of fourth-graders' school breakfast and school lunch recalls obtained during 24-hour recalls and compared with observed intake., Design: Children were interviewed using a multiple-pass protocol at school the morning after being observed eating school breakfast and school lunch., Subjects: 104 children stratified by ethnicity (African-American, white) and gender were randomly selected and interviewed up to 3 times each with 4 to 14 weeks between each interview., Statistical Analysis: Match, omission, and intrusion rates to determine accuracy of reporting items; arithmetic and/or absolute differences to determine accuracy for reporting amounts; total inaccuracy to determine inaccuracy for reporting items and amounts combined; intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) to determine consistency., Results: Means were 51% for omission rate, 39% for intrusion rate, and 7.1 servings for total inaccuracy. Total inaccuracy decreased significantly from the first to the third recall (P=0.006). The ICC was 0.29 for total inaccuracy and 0.15 for omission rate. For all meal components except bread/grain and beverage, there were more omissions than intrusions. Mean arithmetic and absolute differences per serving in amount reported for matches were -0.08 and 0.24, respectively. Mean amounts per serving of omissions and intrusions were 0.86 and 0.80, respectively., Applications/conclusions: The low accuracy and low consistency of children's recalls from this study raise concerns regarding the current uses of dietary recalls obtained from children. To improve the accuracy and consistency of children's dietary recalls, validation studies are needed to determine the best way(s) to interview children.