Different dietary assessment methods, similar conclusions? : comparison of a country's adherence to food-based dietary guidelines as depicted in two population-based surveys using different dietary assessment methods

Karavasiloglou, Nena; Pestoni, Giulia; Dehler, Anna; Sych, Janice Marie; Faeh, David; Rohrmann, Sabine

doi:10.1017/S1368980022000647

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.21256/zhaw-24891

Publication type:	Article in scientific journal
Type of review:	Peer review (publication)
Title:	Different dietary assessment methods, similar conclusions? : comparison of a country's adherence to food-based dietary guidelines as depicted in two population-based surveys using different dietary assessment methods
Authors:	Karavasiloglou, Nena Pestoni, Giulia Dehler, Anna Sych, Janice Marie Faeh, David Rohrmann, Sabine
et. al:	No
DOI:	10.1017/S1368980022000647 10.21256/zhaw-24891
Published in:	Public Health Nutrition
Volume(Issue):	25
Issue:	9
Page(s):	2395
Pages to:	2402
Issue Date:	21-Mar-2022
Publisher / Ed. Institution:	Cambridge University Press
ISSN:	1368-9800 1475-2727
Language:	English
Subjects:	Assessment; Diet; Food-based guideline; Population-based; Survey; menuCH
Subject (DDC):	613.2: Dietetics 614: Public health and prevention of disease
Abstract:	Objective: Different methods of dietary intake assessment are frequently used to assess a population’s diet. In this study, we aimed to compare the adherence to Swiss food-based dietary guidelines as depicted in two Swiss population-based surveys using different methods of dietary assessment. Design: Two population-based, cross-sectional surveys were compared. In the Swiss Health Survey (SHS), diet was assessed via a short set of questions on specific food groups, while in menuCH by two non-consecutive 24-h dietary recall interviews. Setting: To compare the diet depicted in these surveys, we used the Swiss food-based dietary guidelines on vegetable, fruit, dairy product, meat and meat product, fish and alcohol. The weighted proportion of responders meeting these guidelines was calculated for both surveys and was compared overall and by selected characteristics. Participants: Residents of Switzerland, selected from a stratified random sample of the non-institutionalised residents, who agreed to participate in the respective survey. To ensure comparability between the surveys, the age of the study populations was restricted to 18–75 years. Results: In menuCH, approximately 2 % of responders met ≥4 of the selected Swiss food-based dietary guidelines. In the SHS, using a cruder dietary assessment, the corresponding percentage was 20 %. In both surveys, more women and never smokers were meeting ≥4 food-based dietary guidelines compared to men and current or former smokers, respectively. Conclusions: Our study comparing the diet in two population-based, representative surveys detected large variations in guideline adherence depending on the dietary assessment method used.
URI:	https://digitalcollection.zhaw.ch/handle/11475/24891
Fulltext version:	Published version
License (according to publishing contract):	CC BY 4.0: Attribution 4.0 International
Departement:	Life Sciences and Facility Management
Organisational Unit:	Institute of Food and Beverage Innovation (ILGI)
Published as part of the ZHAW project:	Was isst die Schweiz?
Appears in collections:	Publikationen Life Sciences und Facility Management

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
2022_Karavasiloglou-etal_Countrys-adherence-to-food-based-dietary-guidelines.pdf		402.53 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Show full item record

Karavasiloglou, N., Pestoni, G., Dehler, A., Sych, J. M., Faeh, D., & Rohrmann, S. (2022). Different dietary assessment methods, similar conclusions? : comparison of a country’s adherence to food-based dietary guidelines as depicted in two population-based surveys using different dietary assessment methods. Public Health Nutrition, 25(9), 2395–2402. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980022000647

Karavasiloglou, N. et al. (2022) ‘Different dietary assessment methods, similar conclusions? : comparison of a country’s adherence to food-based dietary guidelines as depicted in two population-based surveys using different dietary assessment methods’, Public Health Nutrition, 25(9), pp. 2395–2402. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980022000647.

N. Karavasiloglou, G. Pestoni, A. Dehler, J. M. Sych, D. Faeh, and S. Rohrmann, “Different dietary assessment methods, similar conclusions? : comparison of a country’s adherence to food-based dietary guidelines as depicted in two population-based surveys using different dietary assessment methods,” Public Health Nutrition, vol. 25, no. 9, pp. 2395–2402, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.1017/S1368980022000647.

KARAVASILOGLOU, Nena, Giulia PESTONI, Anna DEHLER, Janice Marie SYCH, David FAEH und Sabine ROHRMANN, 2022. Different dietary assessment methods, similar conclusions? : comparison of a country’s adherence to food-based dietary guidelines as depicted in two population-based surveys using different dietary assessment methods. Public Health Nutrition. 21 März 2022. Bd. 25, Nr. 9, S. 2395–2402. DOI 10.1017/S1368980022000647

Karavasiloglou, Nena, Giulia Pestoni, Anna Dehler, Janice Marie Sych, David Faeh, and Sabine Rohrmann. 2022. “Different Dietary Assessment Methods, Similar Conclusions? : Comparison of a Country’s Adherence to Food-Based Dietary Guidelines as Depicted in Two Population-Based Surveys Using Different Dietary Assessment Methods.” Public Health Nutrition 25 (9): 2395–2402. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980022000647.

Karavasiloglou, Nena, et al. “Different Dietary Assessment Methods, Similar Conclusions? : Comparison of a Country’s Adherence to Food-Based Dietary Guidelines as Depicted in Two Population-Based Surveys Using Different Dietary Assessment Methods.” Public Health Nutrition, vol. 25, no. 9, Mar. 2022, pp. 2395–402, https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980022000647.