Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

A systematic review of the validity of dietary assessment methods in children when compared with the method of doubly labelled water

European Journal of Clinical Nutrition volume 74, pages 669–681 (2020)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Assessing energy intake (EI) in children and adolescents is essential for monitoring population nutrition trends and interpreting clinical outcomes. The aim of this review was to examine the validity of dietary assessment methods for estimating EI in children and adolescents when compared with total energy expenditure (TEE) measured using doubly labelled water (DLW). Six online databases were searched to identify articles published in English. Studies were included if they were conducted in participants aged ≤18 years, if they estimated EI via a dietary assessment method, and if they compared this estimate to TEE measured using the DLW method. The search strategy identified 345 articles, of which 13 articles (12 studies) (n = 306 children) met the selection criteria. Five studies were carried out in children aged 5–11 years with dietary intake of children reported by parents/caregivers. The most common dietary assessment methods used were food frequency questionnaires (n = 5) and weighed food records (n = 4). All methods were found to have some level of misreporting. Child characteristics including weight status, age, and sex were not found to consistently influence the accuracy of reported EI. Five studies employing technology-assisted approaches for assessing dietary intake in children were identified and reported mixed findings. Validity studies using DLW remain sparse in the literature. Studies including participants less than 5 years or older than 11 years, and from diverse ethnicities and socioeconomic backgrounds are warranted to explore other demographic differences that may affect the accuracy of dietary assessment methods. While reported in few studies, technology-assisted methods were found to perform equally well in estimating intakes when compared to DLW and other traditional forms of dietary assessment.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Livingstone MB, Robson PJ, Wallace JM. Issues in dietary intake assessment of children and adolescents. Br J Nutr. 2004;92(S2):S213–22.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Burrows TL, Martin RJ, Collins CE. A systematic review of the validity of dietary assessment methods in children when compared with the method of doubly labeled water. J Am Diet Assoc. 2010;110:1501–10.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Boushey CJ, Kerr DA, Wright J, Lutes KD, Ebert DS, Delp EJ. Use of technology in children’s dietary assessment. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2009;63(Suppl 1):S50–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Walker JL, Ardouin S, Burrows T. The validity of dietary assessment methods to accurately measure energy intake in children and adolescents who are overweight or obese: a systematic review. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2018;72:185–97.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Livingstone MB, Robson PJ. Measurement of dietary intake in children. Proc Nutr Soc. 2000;59:279–93.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Collins CE, Watson J, Burrows T. Measuring dietary intake in children and adolescents in the context of overweight and obesity. Int J Obes. 2010;34:1103–15.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Hill R, Davies P. The validity of self-reported energy intake as determined using the doubly labelled water technique. Br J Nutr. 2001;85:415–30.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Black AE, Prentice AM, Goldberg GR, Jebb SA, Bingham SA, Livingstone MB, et al. Measurements of total energy expenditure provide insights into the validity of dietary measurements of energy intake. J Am Diet Assoc. 1993;93:572–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bandini LG, Must A, Cyr H, Anderson SE, Spadano JL, Dietz WH. Longitudinal changes in the accuracy of reported energy intake in girls 10-15 y of age. Am J Clin Nutr. 2003;78:480–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Subar AF, Freedman LS, Tooze JA, Boushey SIK, Neuhouser CJ. ML. Addressing current criticism regarding the value of self-report dietary data. A J Nutr. 2015;145:2639–45.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gibson RS. Principles of nutritional assessment. 2nd edn. New York: Oxford University Press; 2005.

  12. Livingstone BE, Black AE. Markers of the validity of reported energy intake. J Nutr. 2003;133:S895–S920.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Westerterp KR. Doubly labelled water assessment of energy expenditure: principle, practice, and promise. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2017;117:1277–85.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Schoeller DA, Fjeld CR. Human energy metabolism: what have we learned from the doubly labeled water method? Annu Rev Nutr. 1991;11:355–73.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Block G. Human dietary assessment: methods and issues. Prev Med. 1989;18:653–60.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Boushey CJ, Spoden M, Zhu FM, Delp EJ, Kerr DA. New mobile methods for dietary assessment: review of image-assisted and image-based dietary assessment methods. Proc Nutr Soc. 2016;76:1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Gemming L, Utter J, Ni Mhurchu C. Image-assisted dietary assessment: a systematic review of the evidence. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2015;115:64–77.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gemming L, Rush E, Maddison R, Doherty A, Gant N, Utter J, et al. Wearable cameras can reduce dietary under-reporting: doubly labelled water validation of a camera-assisted 24 h recall. Br J Nutr. 2015;113:284–91.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Haddad L, Hawkes C, Webb P, Thomas S, Beddington J, Waage J, et al. A new global research agenda for food. Nature. 2016;540:30–2.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Coates J, Colaiezzi B, Bell W, Charrondiere R, Leclercq C. Overcoming dietary assessment challenges in low income countries: Technolgocial solutions proposed by the International Dietary Data Expansion (INDDEX) project. Nutrients. 2017;9:E289.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Schoeller DA. Recent advances from application of doubly labeled water to measurement of human energy expenditure. J Nutr. 1999;129:1765–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Dietetics AoNa. Evidence Analysis Manual: steps in the ADA evidence analysis process. Chicago: Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics; 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Sjoberg A, Slinde F, Arvidsson D, Ellegard L, Gramatkovski E, Hallberg L, et al. Energy intake in Swedish adolescents: validation of diet history with doubly labelled water. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2003;57:1643–52.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Burrows T, Truby H, Morgan PJ, Callister R, Davies PSW, Collins CE. A comparison and validation of child versus parent reporting of children’s energy intake using food frequency questionnaires versus food records: who’s an accurate reporter? Clin Nutr. 2013;32:613–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Walker JL, Bell KL, Boyd RN, Davies PS. Validation of a modified three-day weighed food record for measuring energy intake in preschool-aged children with cerebral palsy. Clin Nutr. 2013;32:426–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Elliott SA, Davidson ZE, Davies PS, Truby H. Accuracy of parent-reported energy intake and physical activity levels in boys with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. Nutr Clin Pract. 2015;30:297–304.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Nyström CD, Forsum E, Henriksson H, Trolle-Lagerros Y, Larsson C, Maddison R, et al. A mobile phone based method to assess energy and food intake in young children: a validation study against the doubly labelled water method and 24 h dietary recalls. Nutrients. 2016;8:1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Nyström C, Henriksson H, Alexandrou C, Bergström A, Bonn S, Bälter K, et al. Validation of an online food frequency questionnaire against doubly labelled water and 24 h dietary recalls in pre-school children. Nutrients. 2017;9:1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Henriksson H, Bonn SE, Bergstrom A, Balter K, Balter O, Delisle C, et al. A new mobile phone-based tool for assessing energy and certain food intakes in young children: a validation study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2015;3:e38.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Johansson U, Venables M, Öhlund I, Lind T. Active image-assisted food records in comparison to regular food records: a validation study against doubly labeled water in 12-month-old infants. Nutrients. 2018;10:E1904.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Zhang FF, Roberts SB, Parsons SK, Must A, Kelly MJ, Wong WW, et al. Low levels of energy expenditure in childhood cancer survivors: Implications for obesity prevention. JPHO. 2015;37:232–6.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Nicklas T, Saab R, Islam NG, Wong W, Butte N, Schulin R, et al. Validity of the Remote Food Photography Method Against Doubly Labeled Water Among Minority Preschoolers. Obes (Silver Spring). 2017;25:1633–8.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Dutman AE, Stafleu A, Kruizinga A, Brants HA, Westerterp KR, Kistemaker C, et al. Validation of an FFQ and options for data processing using the doubly labelled water method in children. Public Health Nutr. 2011;14:410–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Gondolf UH, Tetens I, Hills AP, Michaelsen KF, Trolle E. Validation of a pre-coded food record for infants and young children. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2012;66:91–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Börnhorst C, Bel-Serratb S, Pigeota I, Huybrechtsc I, Ottavaerec C, Sioenc I, et al. Validity of 24-h recalls in (pre-)school aged children: Comparison of proxy-reported energy intakes with measured energy expenditure. Clin Nutr. 2014;33:79–84.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Zhang FF, Roberts SB, Must A, Wong WW, Gilhooly CH, Kelly MJ, et al. Assessing dietary intake in childhood cancer survivors: Food frequency questionnaire versus 24-Hour diet recalls. JPGN. 2015;61:499–502.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Elliott SA, Davies PSW, Nambiar S, Truby H, Abbott RA. A comparison of two screening methods to determine the validity of 24-h food and drink records in children and adolescents. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2011;65:1314–20.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Burrows TL, Collins CE, Truby H, Callister R, Morgan PJ, Davies PSW. Doubly labelled water validation of child versus parent report of total energy intake by food frequency questionnaire. AMJ. 2011;4:775.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Nyström C, Henriksson H, Alexandrou C, Bergström A, Bonn S, Bälter K, et al. Validation of an online food frequency questionnaire against doubly labelledwater and 24 h dietary recalls in pre-school children. Nutrients. 2017;9:E66

    Google Scholar 

  40. Elliott SA, Baxter KA, Davies PSW, Truby H. Accuracy of self-reported physical activity levels in obese adolescents. J Nutr Metab. 2014;2014:808659. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/808659.

  41. Aflague T, Boushey C, Leon Guerrero R, Ahmad Z, Kerr D, Delp E. Feasibility and use of the mobile food record for capturing eating occasions among children Ages 3–10 years in guam. Nutrients. 2015;7:4403–15.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Illner A, Freisling H, Boeing H, Huybrechts I, Crispim SP, Slimani N. Review and evaluation of innovative technologies for measuring diet in nutritional epidemiology. Int J Epidemiol. 2012;41:1187–203.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Burrows T, Rollo M, Williams R, Wood L, Garg M, Jensen M, et al. A systematic review of technology-based dietary intake assessment validation studies that include carotenoid biomarkers. Nutrients. 2017;9:1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Lombard M, Steyn N, Charlton K, Senekal M. Application and interpretation of multiple statistical tests to evaluate validity of dietary intake assessment methods. Nutr J. 2015;14:1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Westerterp K. Body composition, water turnover and energy turnover assessment with labelled water. Proc Nutr Soc. 1999;58:945–51.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Schoeller DA. Measurement of energy expenditure in free-living humans by using doubly labeled water. J Nutr. 1988;118:1278–89.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Westerterp KR, Goris AH. Validity of the assessment of dietary intake: problems of misreporting. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2002;5:489–93.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Collins CE, Burrows TL, Truby H, et al. Comparison of energy intake in toddlers assessed by food frequency questionnaire and total energy expenditure measured by the doubly labeled water method. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2013;113:459–463.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge Debbie Booth Faculty of Health librarian at the University of Newcastle for her assistance in running the searches of electronic databases. In addition to Janelle Skinner and Daisy Coyle (JS) for their assisantance in article retrieval, screening and quality appraisal.

Funding

The authors declare no funding for this review. TB is supported by university of Newcastle Brawn Research Fellowship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Priority Research Centre of Physical Activity and Nutrition, Newcastle, NSW, Australia

    T. Burrows, S. Goldman & M. Rollo

Authors
  1. T. Burrows
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Goldman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Rollo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

TB and MR designed the review, TB, MR and SG competed the screening and data extraction and drafted the manuscript, all authors contributed and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. Burrows.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Burrows, T., Goldman, S. & Rollo, M. A systematic review of the validity of dietary assessment methods in children when compared with the method of doubly labelled water. Eur J Clin Nutr 74, 669–681 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41430-019-0480-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41430-019-0480-3

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links