***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: OBJECTIVE : To vali date a range of dietary assessment instruments in general practice . METHODS : Using a r and omised block design , brief assessment instruments and more complex conventional dietary assessment tools were compared with an accepted " relative " st and ard -- a seven day weighed dietary record . The st and ard was checked using biomarkers , and by performing test-retest reliability in additional subjects ( n = 29 ) . OUTCOMES : Agreement with weighed record . Percentage agreement with weighed record , rank correlation from scatter plot , rank correlation from Bl and -Altman plot . Reliability of the weighed record . SETTING : Practice nurse treatment room in a single suburban general practice . SUBJECTS : Patients with risk factors for cardiovascular disease ( n = 61 ) or age/sex stratified general population group ( n = 50 ) . RESULTS : Brief self completion dietary assessment tools based on food groups caten during a week show reasonable agreement with the relative st and ard . For % energy from fat and saturated fat , non-starch polysaccharide , grams of fruit and vegetables and starchy foods consumed the range of agreement with the st and ard was : median % difference -6 % to 12 % , rank correlation 0.5 to 0.6 . This agreement is of a similar order to the reliability of the weighed record , as good as or better than test st and ard agreement for more time consuming instruments , and compares favourably with research instruments vali date d in other setting s. Under-reporting of energy intake was common ( 40 % ) and more likely if subjects were obese ( body mass idex ( BMI ) > or = 30 60 % under-reported ; BMI < 30 29 % , p < 0.001 ) . CONCLUSION : Under-reporting of absolute energy intake is common , particularly among obese patients . Simple self assessment tools based on food groups , design ed for practice nurse dietary assessment , show acceptable agreement with a st and ard , and suggest such tools are sufficiently accurate for clinical work , research , and possibly population dietary monitoring OBJECTIVE The validity of the 24-hour recall , 3-day food record , and 5-day food frequency was assessed to decide on a dietary assessment method for the National Heart , Lung , and Blood Institute ( NHLBI ) Growth and Health Study . DESIGN All subjects were assigned to one of three dietary assessment methods . Unobtrusive observers recorded types and amounts of foods eaten during lunch , and these were compared with the foods reported by the girls in the study . SETTING School lunchrooms in California and Ohio . SUBJECTS 58 girls , aged 9 and 10 years . MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Reporting errors for dietary assessment methods . STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED Descriptive statistics , matched pair t tests , and Spearman correlation coefficients . RESULTS Comparison of the intakes of energy and selected macronutrients showed different ranges of , and median percentage absolute errors for , each dietary assessment method . Percentage absolute errors ranged between 20 and 33 for the 5-day food frequency method ; 19 and 39 for the 24-hour recall ; and 12 and 22 for the 3-day food record . The proportion of missing foods ( ie , observed food items not reported ) and phantom foods ( ie , reported food items not observed ) by each method were 46 % and 40 % , respectively , for the 5-day food frequency ; 30 % and 33 % , respectively , for the 24-hour recall ; and 25 % and 10 % , respectively , for the 3-day food record . APPLICATIONS/ CONCLUSIONS Errors in food reporting and quantification can vary with the type of dietary methodology . Agreement between observed and reported intakes from 3-day food records made it the best overall choice . On this basis , it was selected as the method of assessment for the NHLBI Growth and Health Study 
    Output:
    
Interventions did not appear to increase health inequalities although this was examined in fewer studies .
We found strong evidence to support beneficial effects of child obesity prevention programmes on BMI , particularly for programmes targeted to children aged six to 12 years .