Comparison of nutrient intake data calculated on the basis of two different databases. Results and experiences from a Swedish-Finnish study
Comparison of nutrient intake data calculated on the basis of two different databases. Results and experiences from a Swedish-Finnish study
复制标题
DOI：
10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601639
复制
发表时间：
2003-09-01
影响因子：
4.7
通讯作者：
Becker, W
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hakala, P;Knuts, LR;Becker, W
背景和目的：在食物消费和营养素摄入的国际调查中，当使用不同的数据库和计算程序时，膳食数据的可比性至关重要。本分析的目的是研究的基础上计算的瑞典的食物组成数据库PC-科斯特和芬兰的食物组成数据库Nutrica.Subjects和方法的营养摄入量数据的可比性：共20名男性成年人目前生活在瑞典被选为一组芬兰双胞胎的芬兰双胞胎队列研究。通过饮食史访谈收集食物消耗数据。根据PC-kost计算的30种营养素的估计摄入量与根据Nutrica计算的相应估计值进行了比较。计算程序标准化。结果：在能量、总脂肪、饱和脂肪、碳水化合物、膳食纤维、酒精、胆固醇、维生素A、视黄醇、β-胡萝卜素、维生素D、α-生育酚、核黄素、烟酸、维生素B-12、维生素C和磷的平均摄入量方面，观察到的差异无统计学意义。与Nutrica相比，PC-kost的维生素D摄入量（NS）高出20%，硫胺素摄入量高出23%（P < 0.001），这主要归因于瑞典和芬兰之间食物丰富程度的差异。相反，PC-kost产生的硒值比Nutrica低53%（P < 0.001），这是由于在肥料中添加硒增加了许多芬兰食品中的硒含量。发现蛋白质、单不饱和脂肪酸、维生素B-6、铁和钠（比PC-kost高5-9%）以及多不饱和脂肪酸、叶酸、锌、钙、镁和钾（比PC-kost低4-10%）存在统计学显著差异。这两种方法在这些营养素摄入量上的差异可能是由于食物特定营养素值（如产品配方）的差异，或数据来源、食谱或计算程序的差异所致。大多数营养素的相关系数大于或等于0.81。至少有85%的受试者在每个PC-科斯特五分之一被归类为相同或相邻的Nutrica五分之一的所有nutrities.Conclusions：我们的研究结果表明，占主导地位的一部分，检查的营养素，估计摄入量计算的标准化程序使用的PC-科斯特和Nutrica数据库之间的瑞典和芬兰。某些营养素的差异反映了两国之间食物的实际差异或评估营养素摄入量的方法差异。
Background and objective: In international surveys of food consumption and nutrient intake, it is essential that the dietary data are comparable when different databases and calculation programs are used. The aim of the present analysis was to examine the comparability of nutrient intake data calculated on the basis of the Swedish food composition database PC-kost and the Finnish food composition database Nutrica.Subjects and methods: A total of 20 male adults currently living in Sweden were selected from a group of Finnish twins of the Finnish Twin Cohort Study. Food consumption data were collected by means of diet history interviews. The estimated intakes of 30 nutrients calculated on the basis of PC-kost were compared to the corresponding estimates calculated on the basis of Nutrica. The calculation procedures were standardised.Results: No statistically significant differences were observed in the mean intakes of energy, total fat, saturated fat, carbohydrates, dietary fibre, alcohol, cholesterol, vitamin A, retinol, beta-carotene, vitamin D, alpha-tocopherol, riboflavin, niacin, vitamin B-12, vitamin C or phosphorus. PC-kost yielded a 20% higher intake (NS) for vitamin D and 23% higher intake (P < 0.001) for thiamine than Nutrica, which is mainly attributed to the differences in the enrichment of foodstuffs between Sweden and Finland. Conversely, PC-kost yielded 53% lower values (P < 0.001) for selenium than Nutrica, owing to the increased selenium content in many Finnish foodstuffs as a result of the addition of selenium to fertilisers. Statistically significant differences were found for protein, monounsaturated fatty acids, vitamin B-6, iron and sodium (5-9% higher values from PC-kost) and for polyunsaturated fatty acids, folate, zinc, calcium, magnesium and potassium (4-10% lower values from PC-kost). The variation in the intake of these nutrients between the two methods may be explained by the differences in foodstuff-specific nutrient values (eg product formulations), or differences in the sources of data, recipes or calculation procedures.The correlation coefficient was greater than or equal to0.81 for most nutrients. At least 85% of the subjects in each PC-kost quintile were classified into the same or adjacent Nutrica quintile for all nutrients.Conclusions: Our results indicate that, for a dominant part of the examined nutrients, the estimated intakes calculated by means of standardised procedures using the PC-kost and Nutrica databases are comparable between Sweden and Finland. Differences observed for some nutrients reflect either actual differences in foods between the two countries or methodological differences in the assessment of nutrient intakes.