Purpose: To further characterise the performance of the diet history method and the 24-h recalls method, both in an updated version, a comparison was conducted.
Methods: The National Nutrition Survey II, representative for Germany, assessed food consumption with both methods. The comparison was conducted in a sample of 9,968 participants aged 14-80. Besides calculating mean differences, statistical agreement measurements encompass Spearman and intraclass correlation coefficients, ranking participants in quartiles and the Bland-Altman method.
Results: Mean consumption of 12 out of 18 food groups was higher assessed with the diet history method. Three of these 12 food groups had a medium to large effect size (e.g., raw vegetables) and seven showed at least a small strength while there was basically no difference for coffee/tea or ice cream. Intraclass correlations were strong only for beverages (>0.50) and revealed the least correlation for vegetables (<0.20). Quartile classification of participants exhibited more than two-thirds being ranked in the same or adjacent quartile assessed by both methods. For every food group, Bland-Altman plots showed that the agreement of both methods weakened with increasing consumption.
Conclusions: The cognitive effort essential for the diet history method to remember consumption of the past 4 weeks may be a source of inaccurateness, especially for inhomogeneous food groups. Additionally, social desirability gains significance. There is no assessment method without errors and attention to specific food groups is a critical issue with every method. Altogether, the 24-h recalls method applied in the presented study, offers advantages approximating food consumption as compared to the diet history method.