↓ Skip to main content

The reliability of an adolescent dietary pattern identified using reduced-rank regression: comparison of a FFQ and 3 d food record

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of Nutrition, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The reliability of an adolescent dietary pattern identified using reduced-rank regression: comparison of a FFQ and 3 d food record
Published in
British Journal of Nutrition, May 2014
DOI 10.1017/s0007114514001111
Pubmed ID
Authors

Geeta Appannah, Gerda Karolien Pot, Therese Anne O'Sullivan, Wendy Hazel Oddy, Susan Ann Jebb, Gina Leslie Ambrosini

Abstract

Despite the increasing use of dietary patterns (DP) to study diet and health outcomes, relatively few studies have examined the reliability of DP using different dietary assessment methods. Reduced-rank regression (RRR) is an emerging statistical method that incorporates a priori information to characterise DP related to specific outcomes of interest. The aim of the present study was to compare DP identified using the RRR method in a FFQ with those in a 3 d food record (FR). Participants were 783 adolescents from the Western Australian Pregnancy (Raine) Cohort Study who completed both a FFQ and FR at 14 years of age. A similar 'energy-dense, high-fat and low-fibre' DP was identified in the FFQ and FR that was characterised by high intakes of processed meat and sugar-sweetened beverages, and low intakes of vegetables and fresh fruit. Nutrient profiles for this DP were consistent in the FFQ and FR. Pearson's correlation coefficient between participants' z-scores for the DP identified in the FFQ and FR was 0·35 for girls and 0·49 for boys (P< 0·05). The mean difference between DP z-scores derived from the FFQ and FR was - 0·08 (95 % CI - 0·21, 0·04) for girls and - 0·05 (95 % CI - 0·17, 0·07) for boys. The 95 % limits of agreement were - 2·55 to 2·39 for girls and - 2·52 to 2·41 for boys. These findings suggest that very similar DP may be identified and their z-scores show modest agreement when applying the RRR method to dietary intake data collected from adolescents using a FFQ or FR.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 113 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 17%
Student > Bachelor 19 17%
Researcher 16 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 13%
Student > Postgraduate 9 8%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 21 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 28 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 10%
Psychology 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 27 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 September 2014.
All research outputs
#15,088,168
of 25,411,814 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Nutrition
#4,431
of 6,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,736
of 239,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Nutrition
#44
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,411,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,281 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.5. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 239,964 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.