PMID- 23193765
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20121220
LR  - 20220311
IS  - 0379-5721 (Print)
IS  - 0379-5721 (Linking)
VI  - 33
IP  - 3 Suppl
DP  - 2012 Sep
TI  - A program needs-driven approach to selecting dietary assessment methods for 
      decision-making in food fortification programs.
PG  - S146-56
AB  - BACKGROUND: Dietary assessment data are essential for designing, monitoring, and 
      evaluating food fortification and other food-based nutrition programs. Planners 
      and managers must understand the validity, usefulness, and cost tradeoffs of 
      employing alternative dietary assessment methods, but little guidance exists. 
      OBJECTIVE: To identify and apply criteria to assess the tradeoffs of using 
      alternative dietary methods for meeting fortification programming needs. METHODS: 
      Twenty-five semistructured expert interviews were conducted and literature was 
      reviewed for information on the validity, usefulness, and cost of using 24-hour 
      recalls, Food Frequency Questionnaires/Fortification Rapid Assessment Tool 
      (FFQ/FRAT), Food Balance Sheets (FBS), and Household Consumption and Expenditures 
      Surveys (HCES) for program stage-specific information needs. Criteria were 
      developed and applied to construct relative rankings of the four methods. 
      RESULTS: Needs assessment: HCES offers the greatest suitability at the lowest 
      cost for estimating the risk of inadequate intakes, but relative to 24-hour 
      recall compromises validity. DESIGN: HCES should be used to identify vehicles and 
      to estimate coverage and likely impact due to its low cost and moderate-to-high 
      validity. Baseline assessment: 24-hour recall should be applied using a 
      representative sample. Monitoring: A simple, low-cost FFQ can be used to monitor 
      coverage. Impact evaluation: 24-hour recall should be used to assess changes in 
      nutrient intakes. FBS have low validity relative to other methods for all 
      programmatic purposes. CONCLUSIONS: Each dietary assessment method has strengths 
      and weaknesses that vary by context and purpose. Method selection must be driven 
      by the program's data needs, the suitability of the methods for the purpose, and 
      a clear understanding of the tradeoffs involved.
FAU - Coates, Jennifer
AU  - Coates J
AD  - Tufts University Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, 150 Harrison 
      Ave., Room 126, Boston, MA 02111, USA. Jennifer.coates@tufts.edu
FAU - Colaiezzi, Brooke
AU  - Colaiezzi B
FAU - Fiedler, John L
AU  - Fiedler JL
FAU - Wirth, James
AU  - Wirth J
FAU - Lividini, Keith
AU  - Lividini K
FAU - Rogers, Beatrice
AU  - Rogers B
LA  - eng
PT  - Journal Article
PT  - Review
PL  - United States
TA  - Food Nutr Bull
JT  - Food and nutrition bulletin
JID - 7906418
SB  - IM
MH  - *Decision Making
MH  - Diet
MH  - Diet Surveys
MH  - Energy Intake
MH  - Evaluation Studies as Topic
MH  - *Food, Fortified
MH  - Guidelines as Topic
MH  - Humans
MH  - Mental Recall
MH  - *Needs Assessment
MH  - *Nutrition Assessment
MH  - Reproducibility of Results
MH  - Surveys and Questionnaires
EDAT- 2012/12/01 06:00
MHDA- 2012/12/21 06:00
CRDT- 2012/12/01 06:00
PHST- 2012/12/01 06:00 [entrez]
PHST- 2012/12/01 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2012/12/21 06:00 [medline]
AID - 10.1177/15648265120333S202 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - Food Nutr Bull. 2012 Sep;33(3 Suppl):S146-56. doi: 10.1177/15648265120333S202.