Differential reporting of fruit and vegetable intake among youth in a randomized controlled trial of a behavioral nutrition intervention
Differential reporting of fruit and vegetable intake among youth in a randomized controlled trial of a behavioral nutrition intervention
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12966-019-0774-9
复制
发表时间：
2019-02-01
影响因子：
8.7
通讯作者：
Nansel, Tonja
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sanjeevi, Namrata;Lipsky, Leah;Nansel, Tonja
背景营养干预措施通常依赖于自我报告的摄入量，由于暴露于干预措施，可能容易受到差异报告偏倚的影响。这种差异可能是由于社会需求增加，对饮食的关注增加或回忆准确性提高，并可能使干预效果的估计产生偏差。本研究探讨差异报告偏差的水果和蔬菜摄入量的青年与1型糖尿病参与一项随机对照试验，针对增加全植物food intake.MethodsParticipants（治疗n=66，对照n=70）完成了3天的食物记录在基线，6-，12-，和18个月，从水果和蔬菜摄入量（份数/天）计算。在这些访视时使用基于高效液相色谱法的测定法评估血清类胡萝卜素。线性回归估计水果和蔬菜摄入量与血清类胡萝卜素治疗分配的关系。乘法相互作用项测试的相互作用的治疗分配与水果和蔬菜摄入量对血清类胡萝卜素的每次访问，并在每一组随着时间的推移。ResultsThe协会的水果和蔬菜摄入量与血清类胡萝卜素是显着低于对照组与干预组在基线（=0.22 Vs 0.46）和6个月访视（=0.37 Vs 0.54），如显著的相互作用效应所证明。然而，水果和蔬菜的摄入量与血清类胡萝卜素的关联没有显着差异，随着时间的推移，无论是group.ConclusionsWhile水果和蔬菜与类胡萝卜素的治疗臂更强的关联表明更大的报告准确性，这种差异是明显的基线，并没有改变显着随着时间的推移，在任何一组。因此，结果表明，与治疗组相比，对照组的受试者特异性偏倚更大，并且缺乏通过治疗分配对干预反应的证据。
BackgroundNutrition interventions typically rely on self-reported intake that may be susceptible to differential reporting bias due to exposure to the intervention. Such differences may result from increased social desirability, increased attention to eating or improved recall accuracy, and may bias estimates of the intervention effect. This study investigated differential reporting bias of fruit and vegetable intake in youth with type 1 diabetes participating in a randomized controlled trial targeting increased whole plant food intake.MethodsParticipants (treatment n=66, control n=70) completed 3-day food records at baseline, 6-,12-, and 18-months, from which fruit and vegetable intake (servings/day) was calculated. Serum carotenoids were assessed at these visits using a high-performance liquid chromatography-based assay. Linear regression estimated associations of fruit and vegetable intake with serum carotenoids by treatment assignment. Multiplicative interaction terms tested the interaction of treatment assignment with fruit and vegetable intake on serum carotenoids for each visit and within each group over time.ResultsThe association of fruit and vegetable intake with serum carotenoids was significantly lower in the control versus intervention group at baseline (=0.22 Vs 0.46) and 6-month visits (=0.37 Vs 0.54), as evidenced by significant interaction effects. However, the association of fruit and vegetable intake with serum carotenoids did not significantly differ over time for either group.ConclusionsWhile the stronger association of fruit and vegetable with carotenoids in the treatment arm suggests greater reporting accuracy, this difference was evident at baseline, and did not change significantly over time in either group. Thus, results indicate greater subject-specific bias in the control arm compared to the treatment, and lack of evidence for reactivity to the intervention by treatment assignment.Clinical trial registry number and websiteNCT00999375