Loading…
Influence of Using Different Sources of Carotenoid Data in Epidemiologic Studies
Objective This study compared distributions of carotenoid intake and diet-serum correlations using two sources of carotenoid data: the US Department of Agriculture-National Cancer Institute (USDA-NCI) carotenoid food composition database and values accompanying the Block-NCI Health Habits and Histor...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of the American Dietetic Association 1996-12, Vol.96 (12), p.1271-1275 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Objective This study compared distributions of carotenoid intake and diet-serum correlations using two sources of carotenoid data: the US Department of Agriculture-National Cancer Institute (USDA-NCI) carotenoid food composition database and values accompanying the Block-NCI Health Habits and History Questionnaire (HHHQ).
Design and subjects A 100-item food frequency questionnaire was used to collect dietary data from 2,152 adults, aged 43 to 85 years, who were participating in the Nutritional Factors in Eye Disease Study, a population-based study designed to evaluate nutritional factors associated with age-related eye disease. Blood samples were collected from a random sample of 400 nonfasting participants in the study.
Results Median carotenoid intakes using HHHQ vs USDA-NCI data were alpha carotene (229 vs 223 μg/day), beta carotene (1,321 vs 1,325 μg/day), beta cryptoxanthin (72 vs 21 μg/day), lutein + zeaxanthin (653 vs 811 μg/day), and lycopene (593 vs 1,615 μg/day). All paired differences in carotenoid intake were significantly different from zero (Wilcoxon signed-rank,
P.05): alpha carotene (
r=.33 vs .32), beta carotene (
r=.27 vs .32), beta cryptoxanthin
(r=48 vs .53), lutein + zeaxanthin
(r=.28 vs .24), and lycopene (r=.29 vs .25).
Conclusions Although estimates of carotenoid intake differed significantly, only minor differences in carotenoid rankings and diet-serum correlations were observed using either data source in this population.
J Am Diet Assoc. 1996; 96:1271-1275. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0002-8223 2212-2672 1878-3570 2212-2680 |
DOI: | 10.1016/S0002-8223(96)00332-X |