Bridget Holmes|Katie Dick|Michael Nelson
A comparison of four dietary assessment methods in materially deprived households in England
King's College London|Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs|King's College London|Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs|King's College London|Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs
lowincome households uk concentrate factors associated poor recordkeeping lower literacy numeracy english language skills present study aimed 1 compare validity acceptability three dietary survey methods appropriate reference measures 2 identify method valid acceptable lowincome householdscrosssectional design comparing three 4day dietary survey methods multiplepass 24hour recall food checklist semiweighed method 4day weighed inventory reference measures within subjectslondon uk 2001lowincome households selected using doorstep screening questionnaire 18 60 deprived neighbourhoods london results based 384 respondents 159 males 225 females aged 290 years 240 households respondents mainly white 48 black black british 31 asian asian british 9the dietary survey method preferred interviewers 24hour recall respondents preferred food checklist compared weighed inventory repeat 24hour recalls food checklist yielded higher estimates energy nutrient intakes semiweighed method least liked yielded lowest estimates intakebased partly evidence presented partly evidence presented later publications four multiplepass 24hour recalls recommended appropriate method national study diet nutrition lowincome households uk