Validation of an web-based dietary assessment tool (RiksmatenFlex) against doubly labelled water and 24 h dietary recalls in pregnant women.

Abstract

Introduction: Digital technologies have enabled new possibilities to assess dietary intake and have shown promise in terms of decreased participant burden, improved accuracy and lower costs. However, their potential and validity in pregnant populations are scarcely explored.

Objectives: This study aimed to (a) validate energy intakes obtained from a web-based dietary recall method developed for national surveys (RiksmatenFlex) against total energy expenditure (TEE) by means of the doubly labelled water (DLW) method, and (b) to compare intakes of macronutrients, key unhealthy and healthy foods as well as adherence to food-based dietary guidelines between RiksmatenFlex and repeated 24 h telephone dietary recalls in healthy Swedish pregnant women.

Methods: This study was conducted as a nested validation within the HealthyMoms trial. Intakes of foods, macronutrients and energy were assessed during three days through RiksmatenFlex and 24 h telephone dietary recalls, and Swedish Healthy Eating Index (SHEI) scores were also calculated for both methods (n = 52). For 24 women, TEE was also assessed through the DLW method. Paired Samples T-tests and Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Tests were used to identify differences between means for foods, macronutrients, energy and SHEI scores. Pearson correlation coefficient or Spearman's rho were performed to identify relationships between variables. To compare energy intake (RiksmatenFlex) with TEE (DLW method) and 24 h telephone dietary recalls, Bland and Altman plots were constructed.

Results: Average energy intake from RiksmatenFlex (10,015 [SD 2004] kJ) was not statistically different from TEE (10,252 [SD 1197] kJ) (p = 0.596) (mean difference: -237 kJ/24 h). Correspondingly, there were small mean differences between average intakes of key unhealthy and healthy foods and average SHEI scores between RiksmatenFlex and 24 h telephone dietary recalls. However, the Bland and Altman plots showed wide limits of agreement for all dietary variables (e.g., for energy intake using RiksmatenFlex versus TEE: ±4239 kJ/24 h). High correlations between the investigated dietary variables for the two dietary methods were observed (r = 0.751 to 0.931; all p < 0.001).

Conclusion: RiksmatenFlex captured average intakes of energy, unhealthy and healthy food groups and adherence to food-based dietary guidelines in a comparable way to 24 h telephone dietary recalls and the DLW method. Our results support the validity of RiksmatenFlex as a web-based dietary assessment method for future use in pregnancy for intervention studies and national dietary surveys.