MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897856536 · doi:10.3390/nu10101522

Validity and Reliability of a Short Diet Questionnaire to Estimate Dietary Intake in Older Adults in a Subsample of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging

2018· article· en· W2897856536 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Anne Gilsing, Alexandra Mayhew, Hélène Payette, Bryna Shatenstein, Sharon I. Kirkpatrick, Krystle Amog, Christina Wolfson, Susan Kirkland, Lauren E. Griffith, Parminder Raina

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrients · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de MontréalDalhousie UniversityCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalMcGill UniversityImpactCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-JeanUniversity of WaterlooCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de SherbrookeMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsIntraclass correlationMedicineFood frequency questionnaireGerontologyPsychologyClinical psychologyPsychometricsEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study assessed test-retest reliability and relative validity of the Short Diet Questionnaire (SDQ) and usability of an online 24 h recall among 232 participants (62 years ± 9.1; 49.6% female) from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA). Participants were asked to complete four 24 h dietary recalls (24HRs) using the Automated Self-Administered 24-h Dietary Assessment Tool (ASA24-Canada-2014), two SDQ administrations (prior to recalls one and four), and the System Usability Scale (SUS) for ASA24. For the SDQ administrations, Intraclass Correlation Coefficients ranged from 0.49 to 0.57 for nutrients and 0.35 to 0.72 for food groups. Mean intakes estimated from the SDQ were lower compared than those from the 24HRs. For nutrients, correlation coefficients were highest for fiber, calcium, and vitamin D (45–64 years: 0.59, 0.50, 0.51; >65 years: 0.29, 0.38, 0.49, p < 0.01); Kappas ranged from 0.14 to 0.37 in those 45–64 years and 0.17 to 0.32 in participants >65 years. Among the 70% who completed all recalls independently, the SUS indicated poor usability, though the majority reported feeling confident using ASA24. Overall, the SDQ captures intake with varying test-retest reliability and accuracy by nutrient and age. Further research is needed to inform use of a more comprehensive dietary measure in the CLSA.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.385
Threshold uncertainty score0.877

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations73
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrientsSame topicNutritional Studies and DietFrench-language works237,207