Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Multimethod Training Increases Portion-Size Estimation Accuracy

1997; Elsevier BV; Volume: 97; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1016/s0002-8223(97)00046-1

1878-3570

Judith Weber, Ann Tinsley, Linda Houtkooper, Timothy G. Lohman,

Nutritional Studies and Diet

Previous studies have shown that large errors are common when people are asked to estimate food quantity ( (1) Lansky D. Brownell K.D. Estimates of food quantity and calories errors in self-report among obese patients. Am J Clin Nutr. 1982; 35: 727-732 Google Scholar , (2) Rapp S.A. Dubbert P.M. Burkett P.A. Buttross Y. Food portion size estimation by men with type II diabetes. J Am Diet Assoc. 1986; 86: 249-251 Google Scholar , (3) Blake A.J. Guthrie H.A. Smiciklas-Wright H. Accuracy of food portion estimation by overweight and normal-weight subjects. J Am Diet Assoc. 1989; 89: 962-964 Google Scholar , (4) Webb C.A. Yuhas J.A. Ability of WIG clientele to estimate food quantities. J Am Diet Assoc. 1988; 88: 601-602 Google Scholar ). Many investigators have recommended training people in portion-size estimation techniques to improve their ability to make accurate estimations ( (1) Lansky D. Brownell K.D. Estimates of food quantity and calories errors in self-report among obese patients. Am J Clin Nutr. 1982; 35: 727-732 Google Scholar , (2) Rapp S.A. Dubbert P.M. Burkett P.A. Buttross Y. Food portion size estimation by men with type II diabetes. J Am Diet Assoc. 1986; 86: 249-251 Google Scholar , (5) Guthrie H.A. Selection and quantification of typical food portions by young adults. J Am Diet Assoc. 1984; 84: 1440-1444 Google Scholar , (6) Barrett-Connor E. Nutrition epidemiology how do we know what they ate?. Am J Clin Nutr. 1991; 54: 182S-187S Google Scholar ). In studies that implemented a portion-size training program, estimation errors calculated by absolute value (over-and underestimations are added together) for 17 individual foods ranged from −11% to 77% ( (7) Bolland J.E, Yuhas. Bolland T.W. Estimation of food portion sizes effectiveness of training. J Am Diet Assoc. 1988; 88: 817-821 Google Scholar ), and for 6 individual foods ranged from 21% to 113% ( (8) Yuhas J.A. Bolland J.E. Bolland T.W. The impact of training, food type, gender, and container size on the estimation of food portion sizes. J Am Diet Assoc. 1989; 89: 1473-1477 Google Scholar ) and 23% to 141% ( (9) Bolland J.E. Ward J.Y. Bolland T.W. Improved accuracy of estimating food quantities up to 4 weeks after training. J Am Diet Assoc. 1990; 90: 1402-1404, 1407 Google Scholar ). In a fourth training study, estimation errors calculated by difference (over-and underestimations can cancel each other) for 11 foods combined ranged from 8% to 35% after training ( (10) Howat P.M. Mohan R. Champagne C. Monlezun C. Wozniak P. Bray G.A. Validity and reliability of reported dietary intake data. J Am Diet Assoc. 1994; 94: 169-173 Google Scholar ). The primary objectives of this study were to assess whether adult women trained in a 1-hour portion-size estimation program decreased their portion-size estimation errors after training, and whether the accuracy of their estimation varied by food form (solid, liquid, or amorphous). Use of the Solomon four-group design also provides new information regarding the impact of pretesting on these objectives ( (11) Huck S.W. Cormier W.H. Bounds W.G. Reading Statistics and Research. Harper and Row Publishers, New York, NY1974: 253-258 Google Scholar ).