Assuming the "Best-Fit" Shape of the Usual Nutrient Intake Distribution (with nutriR) Does Not Affect Prevalence Estimates of Nutrient Intake Inadequacy: Results from a Dietary Intake Survey in Ivorian School-Age Children.

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q2 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Katie Ayling, Elise F Talsma, Amoin Georgette Konan, Georges Tiahou, Mory Gbane, Ingeborg Bovee-Oudenhoven, Alida Melse-Boonstra
{"title":"Assuming the \"Best-Fit\" Shape of the Usual Nutrient Intake Distribution (with nutriR) Does Not Affect Prevalence Estimates of Nutrient Intake Inadequacy: Results from a Dietary Intake Survey in Ivorian School-Age Children.","authors":"Katie Ayling, Elise F Talsma, Amoin Georgette Konan, Georges Tiahou, Mory Gbane, Ingeborg Bovee-Oudenhoven, Alida Melse-Boonstra","doi":"10.1016/j.tjnut.2025.05.023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Common methods to assess nutrient intake inadequacy are the estimated average requirement (EAR) cut-point method and the probability of adequacy (PA). It has been postulated that the shape of the intake distribution can have a significant impact on estimates of inadequacy. The \"nutritional intake functions for R\" (\"nutriR\") package has been developed to address this.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to assess the impact of assuming the \"best-fit\" shape of nutrient intake distributions (using nutriR) on prevalence estimates of inadequate nutrient intake, as compared with observed nutrient intake distributions with the EAR cut-point or PA method.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional dietary intake survey was conducted among 443 Ivorian school-aged children (6-12 y) by 24-h recall, with nonconsecutive repeats for 13% of the population. Six methods to estimate the prevalence of intake inadequacy for 11 nutrients were compared: methods 1-3 used single 24-h recall data to either apply the 1) EAR cut-point method, 2) the PA method, or 3) the nutriR method; and methods 4-6 applied the same methods after correction for within-person variation using the Statistical Program to Assess Usual Dietary Exposure, which generates estimates of usual daily nutrient intake.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nutrient intake distributions were right skewed (skewness average 1.0, range: 0.4-2.0) and showed large variation (coefficient of variation average 40%, range: 20%-60%). The prevalence estimates of inadequate nutrient intake were similar across all methods, with a mean difference of ±5 percent point (range: 0-27 percent point). The smallest mean differences, 0.4 and 0.3 percent points, were observed with usual intake data between nutriR and EAR cut-point (method 6 compared with 4), and nutriR and PA (method 6 compared with 5), respectively. Larger differences (∼12 percent point) were observed when comparing single 24-h recall data (methods 1-3) with usual intake (methods 4-6).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Assuming nutrient intake distributions with the shape of \"best-fit\" to the observed intake distribution did not affect prevalence estimates of nutrient inadequacy in this population of Ivorian school children. This study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT06175130.</p>","PeriodicalId":16620,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nutrition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tjnut.2025.05.023","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Common methods to assess nutrient intake inadequacy are the estimated average requirement (EAR) cut-point method and the probability of adequacy (PA). It has been postulated that the shape of the intake distribution can have a significant impact on estimates of inadequacy. The "nutritional intake functions for R" ("nutriR") package has been developed to address this.

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the impact of assuming the "best-fit" shape of nutrient intake distributions (using nutriR) on prevalence estimates of inadequate nutrient intake, as compared with observed nutrient intake distributions with the EAR cut-point or PA method.

Methods: A cross-sectional dietary intake survey was conducted among 443 Ivorian school-aged children (6-12 y) by 24-h recall, with nonconsecutive repeats for 13% of the population. Six methods to estimate the prevalence of intake inadequacy for 11 nutrients were compared: methods 1-3 used single 24-h recall data to either apply the 1) EAR cut-point method, 2) the PA method, or 3) the nutriR method; and methods 4-6 applied the same methods after correction for within-person variation using the Statistical Program to Assess Usual Dietary Exposure, which generates estimates of usual daily nutrient intake.

Results: Nutrient intake distributions were right skewed (skewness average 1.0, range: 0.4-2.0) and showed large variation (coefficient of variation average 40%, range: 20%-60%). The prevalence estimates of inadequate nutrient intake were similar across all methods, with a mean difference of ±5 percent point (range: 0-27 percent point). The smallest mean differences, 0.4 and 0.3 percent points, were observed with usual intake data between nutriR and EAR cut-point (method 6 compared with 4), and nutriR and PA (method 6 compared with 5), respectively. Larger differences (∼12 percent point) were observed when comparing single 24-h recall data (methods 1-3) with usual intake (methods 4-6).

Conclusions: Assuming nutrient intake distributions with the shape of "best-fit" to the observed intake distribution did not affect prevalence estimates of nutrient inadequacy in this population of Ivorian school children. This study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT06175130.

假设通常的营养摄入分布的“最合适”形状(含营养因子)并不影响营养摄入不足的患病率估计:来自科特迪瓦学龄儿童膳食摄入调查的结果。
背景:评估营养摄入不足的常用方法是EAR切点法和充足概率法(PA)。据推测,摄入分布的形状可以对不足的估计产生重大影响。“R的营养摄入功能”(“nutriR”)包装就是为了解决这个问题而开发的。目的:与EAR切点法或PA法观察到的营养摄入分布相比,评估假设营养摄入分布的“最佳拟合”形状(使用nutriR)对营养摄入不足患病率估计的影响。方法:采用24小时回顾法对443名科特迪瓦学龄儿童(6-12岁)进行横断面饮食摄入调查,其中13%为非连续重复调查。比较了六种估计11种营养素摄入不足患病率的方法:方法1-3使用单一24小时回忆数据,应用EAR切入点法(1)、PA法(2)或营养系数法(3);方法4-6在使用通常饮食暴露评估统计程序(SPADE)对个人内部差异进行校正后应用了相同的方法,该程序产生通常每日营养摄入量的估计值。结果:营养摄入分布呈右偏态(偏度平均值为1.0,范围为0.4 ~ 2.0),变异较大(变异系数平均值为40%,范围为20 ~ 60%)。所有方法对营养摄入不足的患病率估计相似,平均差异为±5个百分点(范围:0-27个百分点)。在常规摄入数据中,nutriR和EAR临界值(方法6 vs .4)以及nutriR和PA(方法6 vs . 5)之间的平均差异最小,分别为0.4和0.3个百分点。当比较单一24小时回忆数据(方法1-3)与常规摄入量(方法4-6)时,观察到较大的差异(~ 12个百分点)。结论:假设营养摄入分布的形状与观察到的摄入分布“最吻合”,并不影响科特迪瓦学龄儿童营养不足的患病率估计。临床试验注册编号及获取网站:NCT06175130 www.Clinicaltrials: gov。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Nutrition
Journal of Nutrition 医学-营养学
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
4.80%
发文量
260
审稿时长
39 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Nutrition (JN/J Nutr) publishes peer-reviewed original research papers covering all aspects of experimental nutrition in humans and other animal species; special articles such as reviews and biographies of prominent nutrition scientists; and issues, opinions, and commentaries on controversial issues in nutrition. Supplements are frequently published to provide extended discussion of topics of special interest.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信