Relative validity and reliability of a diet risk score (DRS) for clinical practice.

IF 3.3 Q2 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
BMJ Nutrition, Prevention and Health Pub Date : 2020-10-08 eCollection Date: 2020-12-01 DOI:10.1136/bmjnph-2020-000134
Emily A Johnston, Kristina S Petersen, Jeannette M Beasley, Tobias Krussig, Diane C Mitchell, Linda V Van Horn, Rick Weiss, Penny M Kris-Etherton
{"title":"Relative validity and reliability of a diet risk score (DRS) for clinical practice.","authors":"Emily A Johnston,&nbsp;Kristina S Petersen,&nbsp;Jeannette M Beasley,&nbsp;Tobias Krussig,&nbsp;Diane C Mitchell,&nbsp;Linda V Van Horn,&nbsp;Rick Weiss,&nbsp;Penny M Kris-Etherton","doi":"10.1136/bmjnph-2020-000134","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Adherence to cardioprotective dietary patterns can reduce risk for developing cardiometabolic disease. Rates of diet assessment and counselling by physicians are low. Use of a diet screener that rapidly identifies individuals at higher risk due to suboptimal dietary choices could increase diet assessment and brief counselling in clinical care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We evaluated the relative validity and reliability of a 9-item diet risk score (DRS) based on the Healthy Eating Index (HEI)-2015, a comprehensive measure of diet quality calculated from a 160-item, validated food frequency questionnaire (FFQ). We hypothesised that DRS (0 (low risk) to 27 (high risk)) would inversely correlate with HEI-2015 score. Adults aged 35 to 75 years were recruited from a national research volunteer registry (ResearchMatch.org) and completed the DRS and FFQ in random order on one occasion. To measure reliability, participants repeated the DRS within 3 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 126 adults (87% female) completed the study. Mean HEI-2015 score was 63.3 (95% CI: 61.1 to 65.4); mean DRS was 11.8 (95% CI: 10.8 to 12.8). DRS and HEI-2015 scores were inversely correlated (r=-0.6, p<0.001; R<sup>2</sup>=0.36). The DRS ranked 37% (n=47) of subjects in the same quintile, 41% (n=52) within ±1 quintile of the HEI-2015 (weighted κ: 0.28). The DRS had high reliability (n=102, ICC: 0.83). DRS mean completion time was 2 min.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The DRS is a brief diet assessment tool, validated against a FFQ, that can reliably identify patients with reported suboptimal intake. Future studies should evaluate the effectiveness of DRS-guided diet assessment in clinical care. <b>Trial registration details</b> ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03805373).</p>","PeriodicalId":36307,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Nutrition, Prevention and Health","volume":" ","pages":"263-269"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/bmjnph-2020-000134","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Nutrition, Prevention and Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjnph-2020-000134","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Introduction: Adherence to cardioprotective dietary patterns can reduce risk for developing cardiometabolic disease. Rates of diet assessment and counselling by physicians are low. Use of a diet screener that rapidly identifies individuals at higher risk due to suboptimal dietary choices could increase diet assessment and brief counselling in clinical care.

Methods: We evaluated the relative validity and reliability of a 9-item diet risk score (DRS) based on the Healthy Eating Index (HEI)-2015, a comprehensive measure of diet quality calculated from a 160-item, validated food frequency questionnaire (FFQ). We hypothesised that DRS (0 (low risk) to 27 (high risk)) would inversely correlate with HEI-2015 score. Adults aged 35 to 75 years were recruited from a national research volunteer registry (ResearchMatch.org) and completed the DRS and FFQ in random order on one occasion. To measure reliability, participants repeated the DRS within 3 months.

Results: In total, 126 adults (87% female) completed the study. Mean HEI-2015 score was 63.3 (95% CI: 61.1 to 65.4); mean DRS was 11.8 (95% CI: 10.8 to 12.8). DRS and HEI-2015 scores were inversely correlated (r=-0.6, p<0.001; R2=0.36). The DRS ranked 37% (n=47) of subjects in the same quintile, 41% (n=52) within ±1 quintile of the HEI-2015 (weighted κ: 0.28). The DRS had high reliability (n=102, ICC: 0.83). DRS mean completion time was 2 min.

Conclusions: The DRS is a brief diet assessment tool, validated against a FFQ, that can reliably identify patients with reported suboptimal intake. Future studies should evaluate the effectiveness of DRS-guided diet assessment in clinical care. Trial registration details ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03805373).

饮食风险评分(DRS)在临床实践中的相对效度和可靠性。
导读:坚持保护心脏的饮食模式可以降低患心脏代谢疾病的风险。医生进行饮食评估和咨询的比例很低。使用饮食筛选器,快速识别因次优饮食选择而风险较高的个体,可以增加临床护理中的饮食评估和简短咨询。方法:基于健康饮食指数(HEI)-2015,我们评估了9项饮食风险评分(DRS)的相对效度和信度。健康饮食指数(HEI)-2015是一项综合衡量饮食质量的指标,由160项经过验证的食物频率问卷(FFQ)计算得出。我们假设DRS(0(低风险)至27(高风险))与HEI-2015评分呈负相关。年龄在35岁到75岁之间的成年人从国家研究志愿者登记处(ResearchMatch.org)中招募,并随机完成DRS和FFQ。为了测量可靠性,参与者在3个月内重复DRS。结果:共有126名成年人(87%为女性)完成了研究。平均HEI-2015评分为63.3 (95% CI: 61.1 ~ 65.4);平均DRS为11.8 (95% CI: 10.8 ~ 12.8)。DRS与HEI-2015评分呈负相关(r=-0.6, p2=0.36)。DRS排名37% (n=47)的受试者在同一五分位数内,41% (n=52)的受试者在HEI-2015±1五分位数内(加权κ: 0.28)。DRS具有高信度(n=102, ICC: 0.83)。DRS平均完井时间为2分钟。结论:DRS是一个简短的饮食评估工具,通过FFQ验证,可以可靠地识别报告的次优摄入的患者。未来的研究应进一步评估drs指导饮食评估在临床护理中的有效性。临床试验注册详情ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03805373)。
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
BMJ Nutrition, Prevention and Health
BMJ Nutrition, Prevention and Health Nursing-Nutrition and Dietetics
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信