Validity of U.S. nutritional surveillance:National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey caloric energy intake data, 1971-2010.
Validity of U.S. nutritional surveillance:National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey caloric energy intake data, 1971-2010.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pone.0076632
复制
发表时间：
2013
期刊：
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Blair SN
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Archer E;Hand GA;Blair SN
方法的局限性损害了美国营养监测数据的有效性，以及制定膳食指南和公共卫生政策的经验基础。评估国家健康和营养检查调查（NHANES）热量摄入数据在其历史上的有效性，并检查随着NHANES饮食测量方案的发展，热量摄入估计的有效性趋势。来自NHANES I的28，993名男性和34，369名女性年龄在20至74岁之间的数据的有效性（1971-1974年）至2009-2010年的NHANES评估如下：计算生理上可信的能量摄入值作为报告的能量摄入（rEI）与估计的基础代谢率（BMR）的比率，以及从NHANES rEI中减去估计的总能量消耗（TEE）以创建“视差值”。1)生理学上可信的值表示为rEI/BMR比值和2）差异值（rEI-TEE）。男性和女性的历史rEI/BMR值分别为1.31和1.19（95% CI：1.30-1.32和1.18-1.20）。男性和女性的历史差异值分别为-281和-365千卡/天（95% CI：-299，-264和-378，-351）。这些结果表明存在严重的少报现象。最大的平均差异值为-716千卡/天，肥胖者为-856千卡/天（即，≥30 kg/m2）男性和女性。在NHANES的39年历史中，大多数受访者（67.3%的女性和58.7%的男性）的EI数据在生理上不合理。NHANES II后测量方案的改进导致漏报率小幅下降，rEI人为增加，但在随后的调查中有效性仅略有增加。这些结果和其他方法的局限性表明，估计人口热量摄入趋势的能力，并从美国营养监测中产生与饮食健康关系相关的经验支持的公共政策是非常有限的。
Methodological limitations compromise the validity of U.S. nutritional surveillance data and the empirical foundation for formulating dietary guidelines and public health policies. Evaluate the validity of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) caloric intake data throughout its history, and examine trends in the validity of caloric intake estimates as the NHANES dietary measurement protocols evolved. Validity of data from 28,993 men and 34,369 women, aged 20 to 74 years from NHANES I (1971–1974) through NHANES 2009–2010 was assessed by: calculating physiologically credible energy intake values as the ratio of reported energy intake (rEI) to estimated basal metabolic rate (BMR), and subtracting estimated total energy expenditure (TEE) from NHANES rEI to create ‘disparity values’. 1) Physiologically credible values expressed as the ratio rEI/BMR and 2) disparity values (rEI–TEE). The historical rEI/BMR values for men and women were 1.31 and 1.19, (95% CI: 1.30–1.32 and 1.18–1.20), respectively. The historical disparity values for men and women were −281 and −365 kilocalorie-per-day, (95% CI: −299, −264 and −378, −351), respectively. These results are indicative of significant under-reporting. The greatest mean disparity values were −716 kcal/day and −856 kcal/day for obese (i.e., ≥30 kg/m2) men and women, respectively. Across the 39-year history of the NHANES, EI data on the majority of respondents (67.3% of women and 58.7% of men) were not physiologically plausible. Improvements in measurement protocols after NHANES II led to small decreases in underreporting, artifactual increases in rEI, but only trivial increases in validity in subsequent surveys. The confluence of these results and other methodological limitations suggest that the ability to estimate population trends in caloric intake and generate empirically supported public policy relevant to diet-health relationships from U.S. nutritional surveillance is extremely limited.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
4.2
作者：
Freedman, LS;Midthune, D;Kipnis, V
通讯作者：
Kipnis, V
影响因子：
3.2
作者：
Ferrari, P;Slimani, N;Riboli, E
通讯作者：
Riboli, E
影响因子：
4.3
作者：
Ahuja, Jaspreet K. C.;Perloff, Betty P.
通讯作者：
Perloff, Betty P.
影响因子：
--
作者：
GUENTHER, PM;PERLOFF, BP;VIZIOLI, TL
通讯作者：
VIZIOLI, TL
影响因子：
4.3
作者：
Ahuja, Jaspreet K. C.;Goldman, Joseph D.;Perloff, Betty P.
通讯作者：
Perloff, Betty P.