↓ Skip to main content

Development, validation and implementation of a quantitative food frequency questionnaire to assess habitual vitamin D intake

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Human Nutrition & Dietetics, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 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
Development, validation and implementation of a quantitative food frequency questionnaire to assess habitual vitamin D intake
Published in
Journal of Human Nutrition & Dietetics, January 2016
DOI 10.1111/jhn.12348
Pubmed ID
Authors

M. Kiely, A. Collins, A. J. Lucey, R. Andersen, K. D. Cashman, Á. Hennessy

Abstract

A well-designed, validated quantitative food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) could offer an efficient and cost-effective method for assessing habitual vitamin D intake. The present study aimed to describe the development, validation and implementation of a vitamin D FFQ. National food consumption survey data obtained from Irish adults (18-64 years) were used to identify foods that contribute 95% of vitamin D intake. A winter-based validation study was carried out for the resulting FFQ in 120 females, including 98 women [mean (SD) 65.0 (7.3) years] and 22 girls [12.2 (0.8) years], using a 14-day diet history (DH) as a comparator. Serum 25(OH)D concentrations were analysed. Validity coefficients were calculated using the method of triads. Cross-classification and Bland-Altman analysis were also performed. Median (interquartile range) vitamin D intakes (including the contribution from nutritional supplements) were 5.4 (3.7) and 3.7 (5.9) μg day(-1) from the FFQ and DH, respectively and intakes of vitamin D from food sources were 3.6 (3.1) and 2.4 (2.2) μg day(-1) . The FFQ and DH classified 86% and 87% of individuals into the same and adjacent thirds of wintertime serum 25(OH)D status, respectively. There was a strong association (r = 0.71, P < 0.0001) and no significant systematic or proportional bias observed for the difference between estimates from the FFQ and DH. The validity coefficient for the FFQ was 0.92 (95% confidence interval = 0.80-0.97). Repeatability analysis (n = 56) performed 6-12 months later showed no significant difference in estimates of vitamin D between administrations. The data obtained in the present study indicate high validity and good reproducibility of a short, interviewer-administered FFQ for vitamin D.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 69 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 14%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Professor 4 6%
Other 4 6%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 17 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 17 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 9%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 22 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 24 January 2018.
All research outputs
#4,789,667
of 23,215,490 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Human Nutrition & Dietetics
#503
of 1,415 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,538
of 394,973 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Human Nutrition & Dietetics
#6
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,215,490 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,415 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
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 394,973 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.