Assessment of the Dutch Healthy Diet index 2015 in the Lifelines cohort study at baseline
Background Dietary indices are useful measures to investigate associations between dietary intake and disease development. The Dutch Healthy Diet index 2015 (DHD2015-index), a measure of diet quality, assesses adherence to the 2015 Dutch dietary guidelines. We assessed the DHD2015-index in the Lifel...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of clinical nutrition 2024-03, Vol.78 (3), p.217-227 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 227 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 217 |
| container_title | European journal of clinical nutrition |
| container_volume | 78 |
| creator | Baart, A. Mireille Brouwer-Brolsma, Elske M. de Jong, Hanne B. T. de Vries, Jeanne H. M. Feskens, Edith J. M. |
| description | Background
Dietary indices are useful measures to investigate associations between dietary intake and disease development. The Dutch Healthy Diet index 2015 (DHD2015-index), a measure of diet quality, assesses adherence to the 2015 Dutch dietary guidelines. We assessed the DHD2015-index in the Lifelines cohort study, and compared calculations from basic and detailed dietary intake data. This article replaces the retracted article that was published on 16 May 2022 [
1
].
Methods
Dietary intake was assessed with a specially developed Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ) called Flower-FFQ, which consists of one main questionnaire (heart-FFQ), which asks for intakes of major food groups, and three complementary questionnaires (petal-FFQs), which ask for detailed information on food types within major food groups of the heart-FFQ. The DHD2015-index was assessed using data from the total Flower-FFQ (for 56,982 participants), and using data from the heart-FFQ only (for 129,030 participants). Agreement between the two indices was assessed with correlation and cross-classification.
Results
The median (25th–75th percentile) DHD2015-index score was 75 (65–85) for men and 81 (70–91) for women based on the Flower-FFQ, and 68 (58–77) for men and 73 (63–82) for women based on the heart-FFQ. The Kendall’s tau-b correlation coefficient between the two scores was 0.67 for men and 0.66 for women. Cross-classification into quartiles of the DHD2015-index showed that 59–60% of participants were classified in the same quartile, 36–37% in the adjacent, and 4% in the non-adjacent.
Conclusion
Dietary data from the Flower-FFQ provide the most optimal information to assess the DHD2015-index. However, the DHD2015-index from the heart-FFQ showed good agreement with the index from the Flower-FFQ of ranking participants according to diet quality, and can be used when the DHD2015 index from the Flower-FFQ is not available. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1038/s41430-023-01372-x |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10927538</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2955122491</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c390x-9bc7b31cab58d6f9d4df64065874221d994cf8b12560bdfc82e055ecccfeea1a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kUtv1DAUhS1ERYfCH2CBLLFhE7h-JfEKVS2lSCN10y5YWY5z3aTKxMV20My_x50p5bFg5Sud7x7fo0PIGwYfGIj2Y5JMCqiAiwqYaHi1fUZWTDZ1pWoJz8kKtJKVAGiOycuU7gCK2PAX5Fi0wBom-Yp8O00JU9rgnGnwNA9Iz5fsBnqJdsrDjp6PmOk497ilHJgq4x5ajx6nccZEXRhCzDTlpd9Rm2ln0155RY68nRK-fnxPyM3F5-uzy2p99eXr2em6ckLDttKdazrBnO1U29de97L35fpatY3knPVaS-fbjnFVQ9d713IEpdA55xEts-KEfDr43i_dBntXkkQ7mfs4bmzcmWBH87cyj4O5DT8MA80bJdri8P7RIYbvC6ZsNmNyOE12xrAkw1utuNJ8j777B70LS5xLPsO1UoxzqVmh-IFyMaQU0T9dw8A8VGcO1ZlSndlXZ7Zl6e2fOZ5WfnVVAHEAUpHmW4y___6P7U-XRaUi</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2955122491</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Assessment of the Dutch Healthy Diet index 2015 in the Lifelines cohort study at baseline</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><creator>Baart, A. Mireille ; Brouwer-Brolsma, Elske M. ; de Jong, Hanne B. T. ; de Vries, Jeanne H. M. ; Feskens, Edith J. M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Baart, A. Mireille ; Brouwer-Brolsma, Elske M. ; de Jong, Hanne B. T. ; de Vries, Jeanne H. M. ; Feskens, Edith J. M.</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Dietary indices are useful measures to investigate associations between dietary intake and disease development. The Dutch Healthy Diet index 2015 (DHD2015-index), a measure of diet quality, assesses adherence to the 2015 Dutch dietary guidelines. We assessed the DHD2015-index in the Lifelines cohort study, and compared calculations from basic and detailed dietary intake data. This article replaces the retracted article that was published on 16 May 2022 [
1
].
Methods
Dietary intake was assessed with a specially developed Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ) called Flower-FFQ, which consists of one main questionnaire (heart-FFQ), which asks for intakes of major food groups, and three complementary questionnaires (petal-FFQs), which ask for detailed information on food types within major food groups of the heart-FFQ. The DHD2015-index was assessed using data from the total Flower-FFQ (for 56,982 participants), and using data from the heart-FFQ only (for 129,030 participants). Agreement between the two indices was assessed with correlation and cross-classification.
Results
The median (25th–75th percentile) DHD2015-index score was 75 (65–85) for men and 81 (70–91) for women based on the Flower-FFQ, and 68 (58–77) for men and 73 (63–82) for women based on the heart-FFQ. The Kendall’s tau-b correlation coefficient between the two scores was 0.67 for men and 0.66 for women. Cross-classification into quartiles of the DHD2015-index showed that 59–60% of participants were classified in the same quartile, 36–37% in the adjacent, and 4% in the non-adjacent.
Conclusion
Dietary data from the Flower-FFQ provide the most optimal information to assess the DHD2015-index. However, the DHD2015-index from the heart-FFQ showed good agreement with the index from the Flower-FFQ of ranking participants according to diet quality, and can be used when the DHD2015 index from the Flower-FFQ is not available.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0954-3007</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1476-5640</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1476-5640</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1038/s41430-023-01372-x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38017142</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Nature Publishing Group UK</publisher><subject>692/700/2814 ; 692/700/478 ; Classification ; Clinical Nutrition ; Cohort analysis ; Cohort Studies ; Correlation coefficient ; Correlation coefficients ; Diet ; Diet Records ; Diet Surveys ; Diet, Healthy ; Dietary intake ; Energy Intake ; Epidemiology ; Female ; Flowers ; Food ; Food groups ; Food intake ; Heart ; Humans ; Internal Medicine ; Male ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Metabolic Diseases ; Public Health ; Quality assessment ; Quartiles ; Questionnaires ; Reproducibility of Results ; Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><ispartof>European journal of clinical nutrition, 2024-03, Vol.78 (3), p.217-227</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2023</rights><rights>2023. The Author(s).</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2023. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c390x-9bc7b31cab58d6f9d4df64065874221d994cf8b12560bdfc82e055ecccfeea1a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c390x-9bc7b31cab58d6f9d4df64065874221d994cf8b12560bdfc82e055ecccfeea1a3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-6495-4207 ; 0000-0003-4848-0157 ; 0000-0001-5819-2488 ; 0000-0002-8796-5280</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1038/s41430-023-01372-x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1038/s41430-023-01372-x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27903,27904,41467,42536,51297</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38017142$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Baart, A. Mireille</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brouwer-Brolsma, Elske M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Jong, Hanne B. T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Vries, Jeanne H. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feskens, Edith J. M.</creatorcontrib><title>Assessment of the Dutch Healthy Diet index 2015 in the Lifelines cohort study at baseline</title><title>European journal of clinical nutrition</title><addtitle>Eur J Clin Nutr</addtitle><addtitle>Eur J Clin Nutr</addtitle><description>Background
Dietary indices are useful measures to investigate associations between dietary intake and disease development. The Dutch Healthy Diet index 2015 (DHD2015-index), a measure of diet quality, assesses adherence to the 2015 Dutch dietary guidelines. We assessed the DHD2015-index in the Lifelines cohort study, and compared calculations from basic and detailed dietary intake data. This article replaces the retracted article that was published on 16 May 2022 [
1
].
Methods
Dietary intake was assessed with a specially developed Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ) called Flower-FFQ, which consists of one main questionnaire (heart-FFQ), which asks for intakes of major food groups, and three complementary questionnaires (petal-FFQs), which ask for detailed information on food types within major food groups of the heart-FFQ. The DHD2015-index was assessed using data from the total Flower-FFQ (for 56,982 participants), and using data from the heart-FFQ only (for 129,030 participants). Agreement between the two indices was assessed with correlation and cross-classification.
Results
The median (25th–75th percentile) DHD2015-index score was 75 (65–85) for men and 81 (70–91) for women based on the Flower-FFQ, and 68 (58–77) for men and 73 (63–82) for women based on the heart-FFQ. The Kendall’s tau-b correlation coefficient between the two scores was 0.67 for men and 0.66 for women. Cross-classification into quartiles of the DHD2015-index showed that 59–60% of participants were classified in the same quartile, 36–37% in the adjacent, and 4% in the non-adjacent.
Conclusion
Dietary data from the Flower-FFQ provide the most optimal information to assess the DHD2015-index. However, the DHD2015-index from the heart-FFQ showed good agreement with the index from the Flower-FFQ of ranking participants according to diet quality, and can be used when the DHD2015 index from the Flower-FFQ is not available.</description><subject>692/700/2814</subject><subject>692/700/478</subject><subject>Classification</subject><subject>Clinical Nutrition</subject><subject>Cohort analysis</subject><subject>Cohort Studies</subject><subject>Correlation coefficient</subject><subject>Correlation coefficients</subject><subject>Diet</subject><subject>Diet Records</subject><subject>Diet Surveys</subject><subject>Diet, Healthy</subject><subject>Dietary intake</subject><subject>Energy Intake</subject><subject>Epidemiology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Flowers</subject><subject>Food</subject><subject>Food groups</subject><subject>Food intake</subject><subject>Heart</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Internal Medicine</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Metabolic Diseases</subject><subject>Public Health</subject><subject>Quality assessment</subject><subject>Quartiles</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><issn>0954-3007</issn><issn>1476-5640</issn><issn>1476-5640</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kUtv1DAUhS1ERYfCH2CBLLFhE7h-JfEKVS2lSCN10y5YWY5z3aTKxMV20My_x50p5bFg5Sud7x7fo0PIGwYfGIj2Y5JMCqiAiwqYaHi1fUZWTDZ1pWoJz8kKtJKVAGiOycuU7gCK2PAX5Fi0wBom-Yp8O00JU9rgnGnwNA9Iz5fsBnqJdsrDjp6PmOk497ilHJgq4x5ajx6nccZEXRhCzDTlpd9Rm2ln0155RY68nRK-fnxPyM3F5-uzy2p99eXr2em6ckLDttKdazrBnO1U29de97L35fpatY3knPVaS-fbjnFVQ9d713IEpdA55xEts-KEfDr43i_dBntXkkQ7mfs4bmzcmWBH87cyj4O5DT8MA80bJdri8P7RIYbvC6ZsNmNyOE12xrAkw1utuNJ8j777B70LS5xLPsO1UoxzqVmh-IFyMaQU0T9dw8A8VGcO1ZlSndlXZ7Zl6e2fOZ5WfnVVAHEAUpHmW4y___6P7U-XRaUi</recordid><startdate>20240301</startdate><enddate>20240301</enddate><creator>Baart, A. Mireille</creator><creator>Brouwer-Brolsma, Elske M.</creator><creator>de Jong, Hanne B. T.</creator><creator>de Vries, Jeanne H. M.</creator><creator>Feskens, Edith J. M.</creator><general>Nature Publishing Group UK</general><general>Nature Publishing Group</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6495-4207</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4848-0157</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5819-2488</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8796-5280</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20240301</creationdate><title>Assessment of the Dutch Healthy Diet index 2015 in the Lifelines cohort study at baseline</title><author>Baart, A. Mireille ; Brouwer-Brolsma, Elske M. ; de Jong, Hanne B. T. ; de Vries, Jeanne H. M. ; Feskens, Edith J. M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c390x-9bc7b31cab58d6f9d4df64065874221d994cf8b12560bdfc82e055ecccfeea1a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>692/700/2814</topic><topic>692/700/478</topic><topic>Classification</topic><topic>Clinical Nutrition</topic><topic>Cohort analysis</topic><topic>Cohort Studies</topic><topic>Correlation coefficient</topic><topic>Correlation coefficients</topic><topic>Diet</topic><topic>Diet Records</topic><topic>Diet Surveys</topic><topic>Diet, Healthy</topic><topic>Dietary intake</topic><topic>Energy Intake</topic><topic>Epidemiology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Flowers</topic><topic>Food</topic><topic>Food groups</topic><topic>Food intake</topic><topic>Heart</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Internal Medicine</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Metabolic Diseases</topic><topic>Public Health</topic><topic>Quality assessment</topic><topic>Quartiles</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Baart, A. Mireille</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brouwer-Brolsma, Elske M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Jong, Hanne B. T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Vries, Jeanne H. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feskens, Edith J. M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>European journal of clinical nutrition</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Baart, A. Mireille</au><au>Brouwer-Brolsma, Elske M.</au><au>de Jong, Hanne B. T.</au><au>de Vries, Jeanne H. M.</au><au>Feskens, Edith J. M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Assessment of the Dutch Healthy Diet index 2015 in the Lifelines cohort study at baseline</atitle><jtitle>European journal of clinical nutrition</jtitle><stitle>Eur J Clin Nutr</stitle><addtitle>Eur J Clin Nutr</addtitle><date>2024-03-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>78</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>217</spage><epage>227</epage><pages>217-227</pages><issn>0954-3007</issn><issn>1476-5640</issn><eissn>1476-5640</eissn><abstract>Background
Dietary indices are useful measures to investigate associations between dietary intake and disease development. The Dutch Healthy Diet index 2015 (DHD2015-index), a measure of diet quality, assesses adherence to the 2015 Dutch dietary guidelines. We assessed the DHD2015-index in the Lifelines cohort study, and compared calculations from basic and detailed dietary intake data. This article replaces the retracted article that was published on 16 May 2022 [
1
].
Methods
Dietary intake was assessed with a specially developed Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ) called Flower-FFQ, which consists of one main questionnaire (heart-FFQ), which asks for intakes of major food groups, and three complementary questionnaires (petal-FFQs), which ask for detailed information on food types within major food groups of the heart-FFQ. The DHD2015-index was assessed using data from the total Flower-FFQ (for 56,982 participants), and using data from the heart-FFQ only (for 129,030 participants). Agreement between the two indices was assessed with correlation and cross-classification.
Results
The median (25th–75th percentile) DHD2015-index score was 75 (65–85) for men and 81 (70–91) for women based on the Flower-FFQ, and 68 (58–77) for men and 73 (63–82) for women based on the heart-FFQ. The Kendall’s tau-b correlation coefficient between the two scores was 0.67 for men and 0.66 for women. Cross-classification into quartiles of the DHD2015-index showed that 59–60% of participants were classified in the same quartile, 36–37% in the adjacent, and 4% in the non-adjacent.
Conclusion
Dietary data from the Flower-FFQ provide the most optimal information to assess the DHD2015-index. However, the DHD2015-index from the heart-FFQ showed good agreement with the index from the Flower-FFQ of ranking participants according to diet quality, and can be used when the DHD2015 index from the Flower-FFQ is not available.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Nature Publishing Group UK</pub><pmid>38017142</pmid><doi>10.1038/s41430-023-01372-x</doi><tpages>11</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6495-4207</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4848-0157</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5819-2488</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8796-5280</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0954-3007 |
| ispartof | European journal of clinical nutrition, 2024-03, Vol.78 (3), p.217-227 |
| issn | 0954-3007 1476-5640 1476-5640 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10927538 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals |
| subjects | 692/700/2814 692/700/478 Classification Clinical Nutrition Cohort analysis Cohort Studies Correlation coefficient Correlation coefficients Diet Diet Records Diet Surveys Diet, Healthy Dietary intake Energy Intake Epidemiology Female Flowers Food Food groups Food intake Heart Humans Internal Medicine Male Medicine Medicine & Public Health Metabolic Diseases Public Health Quality assessment Quartiles Questionnaires Reproducibility of Results Surveys and Questionnaires |
| title | Assessment of the Dutch Healthy Diet index 2015 in the Lifelines cohort study at baseline |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T06%3A06%3A57IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Assessment%20of%20the%20Dutch%20Healthy%20Diet%20index%202015%20in%20the%20Lifelines%20cohort%20study%20at%20baseline&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20clinical%20nutrition&rft.au=Baart,%20A.%20Mireille&rft.date=2024-03-01&rft.volume=78&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=217&rft.epage=227&rft.pages=217-227&rft.issn=0954-3007&rft.eissn=1476-5640&rft_id=info:doi/10.1038/s41430-023-01372-x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2955122491%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2955122491&rft_id=info:pmid/38017142&rfr_iscdi=true |