Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2017 Feb 13;9(2):133.
doi: 10.3390/nu9020133.

The Comparative Reliability and Feasibility of the Past-Year Canadian Diet History Questionnaire II: Comparison of the Paper and Web Versions

Affiliations
Free PMC article
Comparative Study

The Comparative Reliability and Feasibility of the Past-Year Canadian Diet History Questionnaire II: Comparison of the Paper and Web Versions

Geraldine Lo Siou et al. Nutrients. .
Free PMC article

Abstract

Advances in technology-enabled dietary assessment include the advent of web-based food frequency questionnaires, which may reduce costs and researcher burden but may introduce new challenges related to internet connectivity and computer literacy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the intra- and inter-version reliability, feasibility and acceptability of the paper and web Canadian Diet History Questionnaire II (CDHQ-II) in a sub-sample of 648 adults (aged 39-81 years) recruited from Alberta's Tomorrow Project. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two groups: (1) paper, web, paper; or (2) web, paper, web over a six-week period. With few exceptions, no statistically significant differences in mean nutrient intake were found in the intra- and inter-version reliability analyses. The majority of participants indicated future willingness to complete the CDHQ-II online, and 59% indicated a preference for the web over the paper version. Findings indicate that, in this population of adults drawn from an existing cohort, the CDHQ-II may be administered in paper or web modalities (increasing flexibility for questionnaire delivery), and the nutrient estimates obtained with either version are comparable. We recommend that other studies explore the feasibility and reliability of different modes of administration of dietary assessment instruments prior to widespread implementation.

Keywords: dietary assessment; feasibility; food frequency questionnaire; reliability.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The founding sponsors had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript and in the decision to publish the results.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study administration timeline and procedures for the Canadian Diet History Questionnaire II (CDHQ-II) paper and web feasibility study. CDHQ-II: Canadian Diet History Questionnaire II.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Schematic of the approach for the intra- and inter-version reliability analyses in the CDHQ-II feasibility study. CDHQ-II: Canadian Diet History Questionnaire II.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Participant flow in the CDHQ-II Feasibility study. ATP: Alberta’s Tomorrow Project; CDHQ-II: Canadian Diet History Questionnaire II. a 17 participants in the Web-Paper-Web group did not complete a web questionnaire at Collections 1 and 3 but returned a paper questionnaire at Collection 2; b 10 participants did not complete a web questionnaire at Collection 1 but returned a web questionnaire at Collection 3.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Bland-Altman plots depicting total energy, carbohydrates and protein intake between paper and web CDHQ-II. (A) Total energy intake for men; (B) Total energy intake for women; (C) Carbohydrates for men; (D) Carbohydrates for women; (E) Protein for men; (F) Protein for women. CDHQ-II: Canadian Diet History Questionnaire II, LoA: Limits of Agreements, MD: Mean Difference. The plots show the 95% LoA between estimates of total energy, carbohydrates and protein intake from paper and web CDHQ-II in men (n = 176) and women (n = 171).

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 3 articles

References

    1. Fraser G.E., Jaceldo-Siegl K., Henning S.M., Fan J., Knutsen S.F., Haddad E.H., Sabaté J., Beeson W.L., Bennett H. Biomarkers of dietary intake are correlated with corresponding measures from repeated dietary recalls and food-frequency questionnaires in the Adventist Health Study-2. J. Nutr. 2016;146:586–594. doi: 10.3945/jn.115.225508. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Subar A.F., Thompson F.E., Kipnis V., Midthune D., Hurwitz P., McNutt S., McIntosh A., Rosenfeld S. Comparative validation of the Block, Willett, and National Cancer Institute food frequency questionnaires: The Eating at America’s Table Study. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2001;154:1089–1099. doi: 10.1093/aje/154.12.1089. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Tucker K.L. Assessment of usual dietary intake in population studies of gene-diet interaction. Nutr. Metab. Cardiovasc. Dis. 2007;17:74–81. doi: 10.1016/j.numecd.2006.07.010. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Shim J.-S., Oh K., Kim H.C. Dietary assessment methods in epidemiologic studies. Epidemiol. Health. 2014;36:e2014009 doi: 10.4178/epih/e2014009. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Freedman L.S., Midthune D., Carroll R.J., Commins J.M., Arab L., Baer D.J., Moler J.E., Moshfegh A.J., Neuhouser M.L., Prentice R.L., et al. Application of a new statistical model for measurement error to the evaluation of dietary self-report instruments. Epidemiology. 2015;26:925–933. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000377. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms

Feedback