Determinants of accuracy in estimating the weight and volume of commonly used foods

A cross‐cultural comparison

Bibliographic Data

ID14721952
AuthorsJames R Hebert (0000-0002-0677-2672, corresponding author), Prakash Chandra Gupta (0000-0002-0719-5694, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research), Ramesh Bhonsle, Ramesh B Bhonsle (Tata Institute of Fundamental Research), Florence Verghese (Tata Institute of Fundamental Research), Cara B Ebbeling (0000-0002-7088-9859, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School), Cara Ebbeling, Roxanne Barrow, Roxanne Y Barrow (University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School), Sarah Ellis (0000-0001-5171-014X), Sarah J Ellis (0000-0003-3074-5831, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School), Yunsheng Ma (0000-0003-2317-3716, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School), MA Yunsheng
Year1998
Volume37
Issue5
Pages475-502
Publication date1998-12-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueEcology of Food and Nutrition (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0367-0244 • E-ISSN: 1543-5237
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/03670244.1998.9991561
OpenAlexW2018099737
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited33

Inaccuracy of dietary self‐reports may result from an inability to estimate portion sizes of foods. To determine the influence of cultural factors, 162 subjects at three study locations in rural India and 100 subjects in Massachusetts, USA were asked to estimate weights and volumes of four commonly used food items. Compared with their Massachusetts counterparts, subjects in India evinced errors in their estimates of food weights which averaged only about 20% as large, with standard deviations less than half as large. In the combined data from the four study locations, relative to those with just primary education, individuals with some college overestimated the small and large reference weights by 79% and 52%, respectively (p <0.01). Implications of this research, including the use of quantitative dietary assessment methods in low literacy populations with relatively little formal education and possibilities of bias in epidemiologic studies, are discussed. Key words: Dietary assessmentportion sizeestimation Notes Corresponding author. Tel: (508) 856–4129. Fax: (508) 856–2022. E‐mail: [email protected]

Environmental health · Geography · Sociology · Statistics · Demography · Food Security and Health in Diverse Populations · Mathematics · Medicine · Nutritional Studies and Diet · Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet · Psychology · Gerontology

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub