Biased Over- Or Under-Reporting is Characteristic of Individuals Whether Over Time or by Different Assessment Methods
- 1 January 2001
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of the American Dietetic Association
- Vol. 101 (1), 70-80
- https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-8223(01)00018-9
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
This publication has 34 references indexed in Scilit:
- Assessing dietary intake: Who, what and why of under-reportingNutrition Research Reviews, 1998
- Determinants and nature of dietary underreporting in a free-living population: the Fleurbaix Laventie Ville Santé (FLVS) studyInternational Journal of Obesity, 1997
- Measurement Error and Results From Analytic Epidemiology: Dietary Fat and Breast CancerJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1996
- Validation of weighed records and other methods of dietary assessment using the 24 h urine nitrogen technique and other biological markersBritish Journal of Nutrition, 1995
- The validation of energy and protein intakes by doubly labelled water and 24‐hour urinary nitrogen excretion in post‐obese subjectsJournal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics, 1995
- The implications of underreporting in dietary studiesAustralian Journal of Public Health, 1994
- Energy metabolism in free-living, ‘large-eating’ and ‘small-eating’ women: studies using 2H218OBritish Journal of Nutrition, 1994
- Differences in energy metabolism between normal weight ‘large-eating’ and ‘small-eating’ womenBritish Journal of Nutrition, 1992
- Food intake in AntarcticaBritish Journal of Nutrition, 1967
- Metabolic studies on large and small eatersBritish Journal of Nutrition, 1961