Uncertainty in intake due to portion size estimation in 24-hour recalls varies between food groups.

Portion size estimation is expected to be one of the largest sources of uncertainty in dietary assessment of the individual. Therefore, we demonstrated a method to quantify uncertainty due to portion size estimation in the usual intake distributions of vegetables, fruit, bread, protein, and potassium. Dutch participants of the European Food Consumption Validation study completed 2 nonconsecutive 24-h recall interviews. In short, the uncertainty analysis consists of Monte Carlo simulations drawing values for portion size from lognormal uncertainty distributions. The uncertainty of the usual intake distribution and accompanying parameters (IQR and the shrinkage factor) were estimated. For the food groups, portion size uncertainty had the greatest effect for vegetables and the least for fruit: the relative 95% uncertainty interval (UI) of the IQR of the usual intake distribution was 0.61-1.35 for vegetables, 0.77-1.24 for bread, and 0.99-1.10 for fruit. For protein and potassium, the resulting relative width of the UI of the IQR for portion size uncertainty are similar: 0.88-1.14 for protein and 0.86-1.14 for potassium. Furthermore, a sensitivity analysis illustrated the importance of the specified uncertainty distributions. The examples show that uncertainty in portion sizes may be more important for some foods such as vegetables. This may reflect differential quantification errors by food groups that deserve further consideration. In conclusion, the presented methodology allows the important quantification of portion size uncertainty and extensions to include other sources of uncertainty is straightforward.

[1]  W. A. van Staveren,et al.  Manual on methodology for food consumption studies. , 1988 .

[2]  F. Clavel-Chapelon,et al.  Estimation of food portion size using photographs: validity, strengths, weaknesses and recommendations , 1995 .

[3]  W. D. de Boer,et al.  Comparison of two models for the estimation of usual intake addressing zero consumption and non-normality , 2009, Food additives & contaminants. Part A, Chemistry, analysis, control, exposure & risk assessment.

[4]  E Riboli,et al.  Validation of a method for the estimation of food portion size. , 1992, Epidemiology.

[5]  N Slimani,et al.  Structure of the standardized computerized 24-h diet recall interview used as reference method in the 22 centers participating in the EPIC project. European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. , 1999, Computer methods and programs in biomedicine.

[6]  P. Robson,et al.  An evaluation of food photographs as a tool for quantifying food and nutrient intakes , 2000, Public Health Nutrition.

[7]  R. Carroll,et al.  Adjustments to improve the estimation of usual dietary intake distributions in the population. , 2004, The Journal of nutrition.

[8]  M Nelson,et al.  Food photographs: practical guidelines I. Design and analysis of studies to validate portion size estimates. , 1998, Public health nutrition.

[9]  H. van der Voet,et al.  MCRA, Release 4.0, a web-based program for Monte Carlo Risk Assessment , 2005 .

[10]  Webb Ca,et al.  Ability of WIC clientele to estimate food quantities. , 1988 .

[11]  L. Ovesen,et al.  Selection of methodology to assess food intake , 2002, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

[12]  D. Midthune,et al.  Statistical methods for estimating usual intake of nutrients and foods: a review of the theory. , 2006, Journal of the American Dietetic Association.

[13]  J. Blundell,et al.  Assessing dietary intake: Who, what and why of under-reporting , 1998, Nutrition Research Reviews.

[14]  L. Ovesen,et al.  Selection of relevant dietary indicators for health , 2002, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

[15]  M. Nelson,et al.  Food Photography I: the perception of food portion size from photographs , 1994, British Journal of Nutrition.

[16]  A. Blake,et al.  Accuracy of food portion estimation by overweight and normal-weight subjects. , 1989, Journal of the American Dietetic Association.

[17]  G J Petot,et al.  Validity of portion-size measurement aids: a review. , 1997, Journal of the American Dietetic Association.

[18]  S. Tsugane,et al.  Within- and between-person variations in portion sizes of foods consumed by the Japanese population. , 1997, Nutrition and cancer.

[19]  W. Willett,et al.  Variability in portion sizes of commonly consumed foods among a population of women in the United States. , 1988, American journal of epidemiology.

[20]  E. Riboli,et al.  Standardization of the 24-hour diet recall calibration method used in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC): general concepts and preliminary results , 2000, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

[21]  A. O'Hagan,et al.  Statistical Methods for Eliciting Probability Distributions , 2005 .

[22]  M. Nelson,et al.  Food photography II: use of food photographs for estimating portion size and the nutrient content of meals , 1996, British Journal of Nutrition.

[23]  W. Rumpler,et al.  Identifying sources of reporting error using measured food intake , 2008, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

[24]  F. G. Berzolari,et al.  An evaluation of a colour food photography atlas as a tool for quantifying food portion size in epidemiological dietary surveys , 2005, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

[25]  L. Andersen,et al.  Two non-consecutive 24 h recalls using EPIC-Soft software are sufficiently valid for comparing protein and potassium intake between five European centres – results from the European Food Consumption Validation (EFCOVAL) study , 2010, British Journal of Nutrition.

[26]  R. Prentice Dietary assessment and the reliability of nutritional epidemiology research reports. , 2010, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[27]  J. Lehtisalo,et al.  Accuracy in the estimation of food servings against the portions in food photographs , 2008, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

[28]  Hilko van der Voet,et al.  Statistical modelling of usual intake , 2010 .