ArticleCurrent developments in nutrition2025
Development, Reproducibility, and Validity of a Semiquantitative Food Frequency Questionnaire for Use among the Adult Population in Reunion Island.
Article in Current developments in nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To date, there is no specific food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) to assess dietary habits in any of the French overseas regions. Objectives: This study aimed to describe the development of a culture and context-specific semiquantitative FFQ for use among the adult population in Reunion Island, to assess its reproducibility and its relative validity compared with 24-h dietary recalls (DRs). Methods: The CARI (observatoire des Comportements Alimentaires à la RéunIon) FFQ was adapted from the NutriNet-Santé FFQ, with a revised list of 181 food and beverage items reflecting local dietary practices and nutritional concerns. To assess its reproducibility, the FFQ was administered twice, 4 wk apart, to a purposive sample of 108 adults in Reunion Island. During the same period, participants also completed a weekly DR to evaluate the FFQ's validity. Reproducibility and validity were assessed for 18 food groups, energy, and 38 nutrients using correlations, cross-classification, and weighted κ. Results: Regarding reproducibility, we found a median rank correlation of 0.56 (nutrients) and 0.64 (food groups). Most participants were correctly classified with a median of 78% (nutrients) and 83% (food group), whereas gross misclassification was low (2.8% and 0.9%, respectively). We found a median weighted κ of 0.44 (nutrients) and 0.47 (food groups). Regarding validity, we found a median crude rank correlation of 0.51 (nutrients) and 0.43 (food groups). Most participants were correctly classified with a median agreement of 71% for nutrients and of 68% for food groups, whereas gross misclassification was low (1.9% and 0.9%, respectively). We found a median weighted κ of 0.32 (nutrients) and 0.27 (food groups). Conclusions: The CARI FFQ has a moderate to good level of validity for ranking food and nutrient intakes, and a good level of reproducibility, supporting its use for dietary assessment in Reunion Island.
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.