ArticleFood & nutrition research2024
Reproducibility and comparison of a digital food frequency questionnaire (DIGIKOST-FFQ) assessing adherence to national diet and lifestyle recommendations.
Article in Food & nutrition research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of a Multidisciplinary Intervention on Fatigue in Lymphoma Survivors With Chronic Fatigue: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial (REFUEL).JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Experiences with healthy eating among individuals with opioid dependence: insights from a dietary assessment.BMC nutrition · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: We have developed a digital semi-quantitative food frequency and lifestyle questionnaire, the DIGIKOST-FFQ, based on the validated paper-based NORDIET-FFQ. Objective: The study aims to investigate the reproducibility of the DIGIKOST-FFQ and to compare the DIGIKOST-FFQ against the NORDIET-FFQ for the adjusted questions for intakes of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, fish, meat, and dairy products. Design: Participants were recruited from May to September 2021 through a random sample from the National Population Register and advertisements on Facebook in Norway. In the reproducibility study, the DIGIKOST-FFQ was completed twice by the participants, 1-2 months apart. In the comparison study, the DIGIKOST-FFQ was completed 1-2 months prior to the NORDIET-FFQ. Results: In the reproducibility study, 317 individuals were included. For 12 out of 16 food groups there were no significant differences in intake estimations between the first and second DIGIKOST-FFQ administrations. A small but significant median difference was observed for fruits (6 g/day) and vegetables (24 g/day). Correlations were satisfactory for all items ( Conclusion: The DIGIKOST-FFQ was able to reproduce diet and lifestyle at the group level. An intended difference for the food groups where questions had been adjusted, was observed between DIGIKOST-FFQ and NORDIET-FFQ in the comparison study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.