VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF A FOOD FREQUENCY QUESTIONNAIRE AMONG LEBANESE CHILDREN FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF ENERGY AND NUTRIENT INTAKE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction In order to evaluate the diet-disease association, valid dietary assessment tools that accurately assess nutritional intake are critical. Childhood is a critical window for intervention to delineate the risk of many nutrition-related diseases later in life. Limited validated tools exist to assess dietary intake in children aged less than 10 years in the Middle East and North Africa Region and in Lebanon. Objectives The main objectives of this study were to develop and validate a Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ) to assess dietary intake among Lebanese children aged 5–10 years. Methods Children were recruited from public and private schools in the Lebanese capital Beirut. Mothers (used as proxy) completed the FFQ (FFQ-1) in the first visit. During the following 4 weeks, 4 Multiple Pass 24 hour recalls (MPRs) were collected. At Week 4, the FFQ (FFQ-2) was completed a second time. Validity tested the developed FFQ against the mean of the MPRs. It was assessed by spearman correlation coefficients and Bland Altman plots. The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and kappa statistic were used to test reliability between FFQ-1 and FFQ-2. Results 120 children completed the study. Spearman correlation coefficients for energy, protein and total fat intakes were 0.60, 0.40 and 0.60, respectively. Other nutrients' coefficients ranged between 0.20–0.65. Bland-Altman's Limits of Agreement showed acceptable agreement. ICCs for energy, protein and total fat intakes were 0.87, 0.85 and 0.85, respectively. Other nutrients' ICC ranged between 0.18–0.90. The kappa coefficients between FFQ-1 and FFQ-2 ranged between substantial and moderate agreement. Conclusions This study's findings indicated that the developed FFQ is valid and reliable among Lebanese children aged 5–10 years. This validated questionnaire will be a useful tool for assessing Lebanese children's dietary intakes. It will also be an asset that other researchers in the region can use or adapt to suit their study populations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".