Comparison of estimated energy intake from 2 x 24-hour recalls and a seven-day food record with objective measurements of energy expenditure in children.

Objective: The objective of the present study was to evaluate energy intake (EI) estimated from two nonconsecutive 24-hour recalls (24-HDRs) and a pre-coded seven-day food record (7-dFR) against objective measurements of energy expenditure (EE) in children. Design: A total of 67 7-8 year-olds and 64 12-13 year-olds completed the 2 x 24-HDRs, the 7-dFR, and woreActiReg® (PreMed AS, Oslo, Norway), a combined position and motion recording instrument, during thesame seven days as the 7-dFR was filled in. Results: In the 7-8 year-olds, EI from the 2 x 24-HDRs (EI2 x 24-HDR) was overestimated with 3% compared to EE (not significantly different), while EI from the 7-dFR (EI7-dFR) was underestimated with 7% compared to EE (P=0.001). In the 12-13 year-olds, the corresponding figures was underestimation by 10% with the 2 x 24-HDRs (P<0.001) and by 20% with the 7-dFR (P<0.001). For both age groups combined, the 95% limits of agreement were -4 • 38 and 3.52 MJ/d for the 2 x 24-HDRs, and -5.90 and 2.94 MJ/d forthe 7-dFR. Pearson correlation coefficients between EI and EE were 0.51 for EI2 x 24-HDR and 0.29 forEI7-dFR, respectively. The proportion classified in the same or adjacent quartiles was 76% for EI224-HDRand 73% for EI7-dFR in the 78 year-olds, and 83% for EI2 x 24-HDR and 70% for EI7-dFR in the 12-13 year-olds. Conclusion: Misreporting of EI seemed modest with both the 2 x 24-HDRs and the 7-dFR in the 7-8 year-olds when compared to EE measured with ActiReg®. Under-reporting appeared to be more evident inthe 12-13 year-olds, especially with the 7-dFR. Compared to measurements of EE, the 2 x 24-HDRs seemed to perform slightly better than the 7-dFR in terms of ranking of individuals according to EI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]