Search

Copyright of Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning is the property of Society for Teaching & Learning in Higher Education and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objective: Web-based dietary interventions could support healthy eating. The Advice, Ideas and Motivation for My Eating (Aim4Me) trial investigated the impact of three levels of personalised web-based dietary feedback on diet quality in young adults. Secondary aims were to investigate participant retention, engagement and satisfaction. Design: Randomised controlled trial. Setting: Web-based intervention for young adults living in Australia. Participants: 18–24-year-olds recruited across Australia were randomised to Group 1 (control: brief diet quality feedback), Group 2 (comprehensive feedback on nutritional adequacy + website nutrition resources) or Group 3 (30-min dietitian consultation + Group 2 elements). Australian Recommended Food Score (ARFS) was the primary outcome. The ARFS subscales and percentage energy from nutrient-rich foods (secondary outcomes) were analysed at 3, 6 and 12 months using generalised linear mixed models. Engagement was measured with usage statistics and satisfaction with a process evaluation questionnaire. Results: Participants (n 1005, 85 % female, mean age 21·7 ± 2·0 years) were randomised to Group 1 (n 343), Group 2 (n 325) and Group 3 (n 337). Overall, 32 (3 %), 88 (9 %) and 141 (14 %) participants were retained at 3, 6 and 12 months, respectively. Only fifty-two participants (15 % of Group 3) completed the dietitian consultation. No significant group-by-time interactions were observed (P > 0·05). The proportion of participants who visited the thirteen website pages ranged from 0·6 % to 75 %. Half (Group 2 = 53 %, Group 3 = 52 %) of participants who completed the process evaluation (Group 2, n 111; Group 3, n 90) were satisfied with the programme. Conclusion: Recruiting and retaining young adults in web-based dietary interventions are challenging. Future research should consider ways to optimise these interventions, including co-design methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Nutrition knowledge is an important determinant of diet-related behaviour; however, the use of disparate assessment tools creates challenges for comparing nutrition knowledge levels and correlates across studies, geographic contexts, and populations. Using the Food Processing Knowledge (FoodProK) score – a measure of nutrition knowledge based on consumers' ability to understand and apply the concept of food processing in a functional task – nutrition knowledge levels and associated correlates were assessed in five countries. Methods: Adults, aged ≥18 years, were recruited through the Nielsen Consumer Insights Global Panel in Australia (n = 3997), Canada (n = 4170), Mexico (n = 4044), the United Kingdom (UK) (n = 5363), and the United States (US) (n = 4527). Respondents completed web-based surveys in November–December 2018. Functional nutrition knowledge was measured using the FoodProK score. Linear regression models examined associations between FoodProK score and sociodemographic, dietary behaviours, and knowledge-related characteristics. Results: FoodProK scores (maximum, 8 points) were highest in Canada (mean: 5.1) and Australia (5.0), followed by the UK (4.8), Mexico (4.7), and the US (4.6). Health literacy and self-rated nutrition knowledge were positively associated with FoodProK scores (p <.001). FoodProK scores were higher among those who reported vegetarian/other dietary practices (p <.001); made efforts to consume less sodium, trans fats, or sugars (p <.001); ≥60 years (p = 0.002), female (p <.001), and 'majority' ethnic group respondents in their respective countries (p <.001). Conclusions: This study found differences in consumers' ability to distinguish levels of food processing for common foods, with somewhat lower levels of nutrition knowledge in countries with the highest intake of highly processed foods. Nutrition knowledge differences based on consumer characteristics highlight the need for accessible policy interventions that support uptake of healthy eating efforts across populations to avoid exacerbating nutrition-related disparities. Tools such as the FoodProK can be used to evaluate the impact of policies targeting nutrition knowledge across contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study aimed to identify correlates of nutrition label awareness and use, particularly subgroup differences among consumers. Two label types were assessed: (1) nutrition facts tables (NFt) in Australia, Canada, Mexico, UK, and USA and (2) front-of-package (FOP) labels, including mandatory Guideline Daily Amounts (Mexico), voluntary Health Star Ratings (Australia) and voluntary Traffic Lights (UK).Design: Respondents were recruited using Nielsen Consumer Insights Global Panel (n 21 586) and completed online surveys in November-December 2018. Linear regression and generalised linear mixed models examined differences in label use and awareness between countries and label type based on sociodemographic, knowledge-related and dietary characteristics.Setting: Australia, Canada, Mexico, UK and USA.Participants: Adults (≥18 years).Results: Respondents from the USA, Canada and Australia reported significantly higher NFt use and awareness than those in Mexico and the UK. Mexican respondents reported the highest level of FOP label awareness, whereas UK respondents reported the highest FOP label use. NFt use was higher among females, 'minority' ethnic groups, those with higher nutrition knowledge and respondents with 'adequate literacy' compared with those with 'high likelihood of limited literacy'. FOP label use was higher among those with a 'high likelihood of limited literacy' compared with 'adequate literacy' across countries.Conclusions: Lower use of mandatory Guideline Daily Amount labels compared with voluntary FOP labelling systems provides support for Mexico's decision to switch to mandatory 'high-in' warning symbols. The patterns of consumer label use and awareness across sociodemographic and knowledge-related characteristics suggest that simple FOP labels may encourage broader use across countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Adherence to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans is often assessed using the Healthy Eating Index (HEI). The HEI total score reflects overall diet quality, with all aspects equally important. Using the traditional weighting scheme for the HEI, all components are generally weighted equally in the total score. However, there is limited empirical basis for applying the traditional weighting for pregnancy specifically.Objectives: We aimed to assess associations between the 12 HEI-2010 component scores and select pregnancy outcomes.Methods: The Nulliparous Pregnancy Outcomes Study: Monitoring Mothers-to-Be was a prospective pregnancy cohort (US multicenter, 2010-2013). Participants enrolled in the study between 6 and 13 weeks of gestation. An FFQ assessed usual dietary intake 3 months prior to pregnancy (n = 7880). Scores for the HEI-2010 components were assigned using prespecified standards based on densities (standard units per 1000 kcal) of relevant food groups for most components, a ratio (PUFAs and MUFAs to SFAs) for fatty acids, and the contribution to total energy for empty calories. Using binomial regression, we estimated risk differences between each component score and cases of small-for-gestational age (SGA) birth, preterm birth, preeclampsia, and gestational diabetes, controlling for total energy and scores for the other HEI-2010 components.Results: Higher scores for greens and beans and total vegetables were associated with fewer cases of SGA birth, preterm birth, and preeclampsia. For instance, every 1-unit increase in the greens and beans score was associated with 1.2 fewer SGA infants (95% CI, 0.7-1.7), 0.7 fewer preterm births (95% CI, 0.3-1.1), and 0.7 fewer preeclampsia cases (95% CI, 0.2-1.1) per 100 deliveries. For gestational diabetes, the associations were null.Conclusions: Vegetable-rich diets were associated with fewer cases of SGA birth, preterm birth, and preeclampsia, controlling for overall diet quality. Examination of the equal weighting of the HEI components (and underlying guidance) is needed for pregnancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Existing nutrition knowledge measures tend to be lengthy or tailored for specific contexts, making them unsuitable for population-based surveys. Given the growing emphasis within country-specific dietary guidelines on reducing consumption of highly processed foods, consumers' ability to understand and apply principles related to level of food processing could serve as a proxy measure of general nutrition knowledge. To examine the content validity of the Food Processing Knowledge (FoodProK) score based on subject matter expert consultation with Registered dietitian nutritionists (RDNs). RDNs in Canada (n = 64) completed an online survey, including the FoodProK, in January 2020. Participants rated the "healthiness" of 12 food products from four categories (fruit, meat, dairy, and grains) on a scale from 1 to 10. FoodProK scores were assigned based on concordance of ratings within each food category, with rankings according to the NOVA classification system, with less processed foods representing higher healthiness. For each category, one-way repeated-measures analysis of variance models tested whether the three product ratings were significantly different from one another. Descriptive statistics compared ratings and FoodProK scores across categories. Open-ended feedback was solicited to assess face validity of the score. RDNs' FoodProK scores were strongly associated with level of food processing. Almost one in three RDNs received perfect FoodProK scores, and the mean score was 7.0 of 8.0 possible points. Within each category, the three foods received significantly different healthiness ratings, in the same order as the NOVA system (P < 0.001 for all contrasts). Open-ended responses showed that RDNs did not perceive meaningful differences between the processed meat products, suggesting the need to change one of the products in the meat category. Overall, 80% of RDNs reported level of processing as an important indicator of the healthiness of foods. Level of food processing represents a promising framework for assessing general nutrition knowledge in population-based surveys. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Technological innovations allow for collection of 24-h recalls (24HRs) in a broader range of studies than previously possible. The web-based Automated Self-Administered 24-Hour Dietary Assessment Tool (ASA24) has been shown to be feasible and to perform well in capturing true intake among adults. However, data to inform use with children are limited.Objective: This observational feeding study was conducted to evaluate children's ability to accurately report a lunchtime meal using ASA24 without assistance.Methods: The study was conducted among children (n = 100) aged 10-13 y within a school setting. Students were served an individual cheese pizza, baby carrots, ranch dip, yogurt, a cookie, and 1 choice of water, juice, or milk. Plate waste was collected and weighed. The next day, participants completed ASA24 and a sociodemographic questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were generated to determine match rates by food item and age, and linear regression analyses were conducted to examine associations between sociodemographic characteristics and accuracy of reported energy and nutrient intake. Associations between true and reported energy and nutrient intakes and portion sizes were assessed with use of t tests.Results: Just under half (49%) of children fully completed ASA24 (median time, 41 min). Children reported an exact, close, or far match for 58% of all foods and beverages consumed, ranging from 29% for dip to 76% for pizza, but also reported some items not consumed as part of the study meal. Older children completed the recall in a shorter time than younger children (mean 31 among 13 y compared with 52 min among 10 y). Intakes of energy (39%), protein (33%), and sodium (78%) were significantly overestimated, whereas portion sizes for cookies (53%) and juice (69%) were underestimated.Conclusions: Children can report some foods and drinks consumed using ASA24, but our findings suggest challenges with independent completion, necessitating research to examine strategies, such as training and resources, to support data quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Challenges and complexities associated with assessing dietary intakes are numerous, but not insurmountable. This opinion paper from Canadian researchers draws attention to the importance of building capacity and providing funding opportunities for research in dietary assessment methods in Canada and elsewhere. Such strategies would contribute to a better understanding of the roles played by diet in human health and better translation of this information into the most meaningful and effective dietary guidelines, policies, and interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent reports have asserted that, because of energy underreporting, dietary self-report data suffer from measurement error so great that findings that rely on them are of no value. This commentary considers the amassed evidence that shows that self-report dietary intake data can successfully be used to inform dietary guidance and public health policy. Topics discussed include what is known and what can be done about the measurement error inherent in data collected by using self-report dietary assessment instruments and the extent and magnitude of underreporting energy compared with other nutrients and food groups. Also discussed is the overall impact of energy underreporting on dietary surveillance and nutritional epidemiology. In conclusion, 7 specific recommendations for collecting, analyzing, and interpreting self-report dietary data are provided: (1) continue to collect self-report dietary intake data because they contain valuable, rich, and critical information about foods and beverages consumed by populations that can be used to inform nutrition policy and assess diet-disease associations; (2) do not use self-reported energy intake as a measure of true energy intake; (3) do use self-reported energy intake for energy adjustment of other self-reported dietary constituents to improve risk estimation in studies of diet-health associations; (4) acknowledge the limitations of self-report dietary data and analyze and interpret them appropriately; (5) design studies and conduct analyses that allow adjustment for measurement error; (6) design new epidemiologic studies to collect dietary data from both short-term (recalls or food records) and long-term (food-frequency questionnaires) instruments on the entire study population to allow for maximizing the strengths of each instrument; and (7) continue to develop, evaluate, and further expand methods of dietary assessment, including dietary biomarkers and methods using new technologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Twenty-four-hour dietary recalls provide high-quality intake data but have been prohibitively expensive for large epidemiologic studies. This study's goal was to assess whether the web-based Automated Self-Administered 24-Hour Recall (ASA24) performs similarly enough to the standard interviewer-administered, Automated Multiple-Pass Method (AMPM) 24-hour dietary recall to be considered a viable alternative. In 2010-2011, 1,081 adults from 3 integrated health systems in Detroit, Michigan; Marshfield,Wisconsin; and Kaiser-Permanente Northern California participated in a field trial. A quota design ensured a diverse sample by sex, age, and race/ethnicity. Each participant was asked to complete 2 recalls and was randomly assigned to 1 of 4 protocols differing by type of recall and administration order. For energy, the mean intakes were 2,425 versus 2,374 kcal for men and 1,876 versus 1,906 kcal for women by AMPM and ASA24, respectively. Of 20 nutrients/food groups analyzed and controlling for false discovery rate, 87%were judged equivalent at the 20% bound. ASA24 was preferred overAMPM by 70% of the respondents. Attrition was lower in the ASA24/AMPM study group than in the AMPM/ASA24 group, and it was lower in the ASA24/ASA24 group than in the AMPM/AMPM group. ASA24 offers the potential to collect high-quality dietary intake information at low cost with less attrition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A longstanding goal of dietary surveillance has been to estimate the proportion of the population with intakes above or below a target, such as a recommended level of intake. However, until now, statistical methods for assessing the alignment of food intakes with recommendations have been lacking. The purposes of this study were to demonstrate the National Cancer Institute's method of estimating the distribution of usual intake of foods and determine the proportion of the U.S. population who does not meet federal dietary recommendations. Data were obtained from the 2001-2004 NHANES for 16,338 persons, aged 2 y and older. Quantities of foods reported on 24-h recalls were translated into amounts of various food groups using the MyPyramid Equivalents Database. Usual dietary intake distributions were modeled, accounting for sequence effect, weekend/weekday effect, sex, age, poverty income ratio, and race/ethnicity. The majority of the population did not meet recommendations for all of the nutrient-rich food groups, except total grains and meat and beans. Concomitantly, overconsumption of energy from solid fats, added sugars, and alcoholic beverages ("empty calories") was ubiquitous. Over 80% of persons age ⩾71 y and over 90% of all other sex-age groups had intakes of empty calories that exceeded the discretionary calorie allowances. In conclusion, nearly the entire U.S. population consumes a diet that is not on par with recommendations. These findings add another piece to the rather disturbing picture that is emerging of a nation's diet in crisis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Front-of-package (FOP) nutrition labeling systems differ in how they rate food and beverage products. There is a need to examine the implications of these differences, including their focus on nutrients of public health concern. Our aim was to examine the impacts of 4 common FOP labels on consumers' purchases of products that received conflicting ratings across FOP systems. In an experimental marketplace, participants were randomized to complete a series of purchases under 1 of 5 FOP conditions: no label, "high in" nutrient labels, multiple traffic light, Health Star Rating, or a 5-color nutrition grade. A final sample of 3,584 Canadians (13 years and older) were recruited from shopping centers in March to May 2018. Probability of purchasing was assessed for 5 product categories (100% fruit juice, plain milk, chocolate milk, cheese snacks, and diet beverages), which received conflicting ratings across the FOP conditions. Separate generalized linear mixed models estimated the influence of FOP condition on 5 binary outcomes (1 = purchased, 0 = not purchased) corresponding to the product categories. Few differences were observed among the full sample. Among participants who noticed the labels (n = 1,993), those in the Health Star Rating condition were 4.5 percentage points (95% CI –7.0 to –1.9) more likely to purchase 100% fruit juice (compared to multiple traffic light) and 3.3 (95% CI 0.4 to 6.2) and 3.0 percentage points (95% CI 0.1 to 6.1) more likely to purchase cheese snacks (compared to no label and "high in"). "High in" labels produced fewer purchases of chocolate milk than no label. Despite some similarities, existing FOP systems differ in the extent to which they promote or dissuade purchases of common product categories. Although the Health Star Rating might encourage purchases of products with certain positive nutritional attributes, "high in" and multiple traffic light systems might more effectively discourage purchases of products contributing nutrients of public health concern. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Household food insecurity constrains food selection, but whether the dietary compromises associated with this problem heighten the risk of nutrient inadequacies is unclear. The objectives of this study were to examine the relationship between household food security status and adults' and children's dietary intakes and to estimate the prevalence of nutrient inadequacies among adults and children, differentiating by household food security status. We analyzed 24-h recall and household food security data for persons aged 1-70 y from the 2004 Canadian Community Health Survey (cycle 2.2). The relationship between adults' and children's nutrient and food intakes and household food security status was assessed using regression analysis. Estimates of the prevalence of inadequate nutrient intakes by food security status and age/sex group were calculated using probability assessment methods. Poorer dietary intakes were observed among adolescents and adults in food-insecure households and many of the differences by food security status persisted after accounting for potential confounders in multivariate analyses. Higher estimated prevalences of nutrient inadequacy were apparent among adolescents and adults in food-insecure households, with the differences most marked for protein, vitamin A, thiamin, riboflavin, vitamin B-6, folate, vitamin B-12, magnesium, phosphorus, and zinc. Among children, few differences in dietary intakes by household food security status were apparent and there was little indication of nutrient inadequacy. This study indicates that for adults and, to some degree, adolescents, food insecurity is associated with inadequate nutrient intakes. These findings highlight the need for concerted public policy responses to ameliorate household food insecurity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A response from the authors of the article "Addressing Current Criticism Regarding the Value of Self-Report Dietary Data" in the 2015 issue is presented.

Introduction: Two studies were conducted to evaluate the National Cancer Institute (NCI)'s web-based Automated Self-Administered 24-hour Recall (ASA24) system, which was developed to facilitate the collection of 24-hour dietary recalls in largescale research. Hypothesis: Energy, nutrient and food group estimates, response rates, and preferences are comparable between ASA24 and USDA's interviewer-administered Automated Multiple-Pass Method (AMPM). Methods: Study 1 assessed the response rates and data collected using ASA24 compared to AMPM. About 1200 participants were recruited from three integrated health systems using quota sampling to ensure representation of a range of ages and race/ethnicity groups. Participants were asked to complete two 24HRs, 4-7 weeks apart, and randomized into four study groups: 1) two ASA24s; 2) two AMPMs; 3) ASA24 first and AMPM second; and 4) AMPM first and ASA24 second. Study 2 assessed the validity of ASA24 compared to AMPM in a one-day feeding study. Eighty-one participants visited a study center to consume three meals from a buffet. All containers were unobtrusively weighed before and after each participant served him/herself; plate waste was also weighed. The next day, participants returned to the center to complete either ASA24 or AMPM. Results: Study 1: Almost all enrolled participants (95%) completed at least one recall and 80% completed two; response rates did not differ by recall mode. Estimated intakes of energy, nutrients and food groups were comparable for ASA24 and AMPM; for example, energy, 2132 vs. 2126 kcal; fat, 84.9 vs. 82.8 g; saturated fatty acids, 27.9 vs. 26.9 g; fiber, 18.4 vs. 18.4 g; and fruits and vegetables, 3.0 vs. 3.1 cup equivalents. Of participants randomized to complete one ASA24 and one AMPM, a greater percentage preferred ASA24. Study 2: The examination of foods and drinks reported showed that exact or close matches were recalled for 76.9% of items truly consumed among ASA24 respondents compared to 82.5% among AMPM respondents. Far matches were reported for 3.1% of items consumed among ASA24 respondents compared to 0.7% for AMPM. The proportions of foods or drinks consumed but not reported (exclusions) were 20.4% and 16.8% for ASA24 and AMPM, respectively. Median differences between reported and true intakes for energy, nutrient and most food groups were not significantly different between ASA24 and AMPM. Conclusion: ASA24 performs well relative to traditional interviewer-administered recalls and is feasible for use in large-scale research. The tool, which offers significant savings over interviewer-administered recalls, is publicly available from NCI and has been used in over 800 studies to collect over 113,000 dietary recalls. The tool is currently being updated to run on mobile applications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]