Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorFitzpatrick, NK
dc.contributor.authorCapra, S
dc.contributor.authorShore, A
dc.contributor.authorBriskey, D
dc.contributor.authorJackman, S
dc.contributor.authorBowtell, J
dc.contributor.authorChachay, V
dc.date.accessioned2024-03-04T09:37:01Z
dc.date.issued2023-12-22
dc.date.updated2024-03-02T00:04:53Z
dc.description.abstractHabitual dietary intake measurement of carotenoids lutein and zeaxanthin (L/Z) has often been omitted or attempted with tools of unknown validity in past research. It was hypothesized that the dietary assessment tool, the L/Z screener, developed as part of this study, would be valid with agreement within 0.25 mg/day when compared against multiple 24-hour diet recalls in healthy Australian and United Kingdom adults. Two screeners with 91 food items were developed, 1 with a recall timeframe of a month and the other a week. Over 4 weeks, 56 Australian and 47 United Kingdom participants completed 4 weekly screeners, 2 monthly screeners, and eight 24-hour diet recalls. Validity was assessed through Bland-Altman plot analysis. L/Z intake measured by all tools was significantly correlated, with correlation coefficients from 0.58 to 0.83. Despite these correlations, the screeners were not valid, with poor Bland-Altman plot agreement when compared with the diet recalls. The Australian weekly screener performed best, demonstrating a mean difference of 0.51 mg/day and 95% limits of agreement between -1.46 mg/day and 2.49 mg/day of L/Z intake. Baby spinach, broccoli, and pumpkin provided the greatest proportion of L/Z intake. The low validity may be explained by high rates of misestimation or missed capture of moderate to high L/Z containing foods such as baby spinach. Prior research reliant on correlational statistics for L/Z tool validity should be interpreted with caution, and future screener development should prioritize accurate capture of high contribution foods.en_GB
dc.format.extent68-79
dc.identifier.citationVol. 122, pp. 68-79en_GB
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.nutres.2023.12.010
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/135455
dc.identifierORCID: 0000-0003-3039-308X (Shore, Angela)
dc.identifierORCID: 0000-0002-4281-9212 (Bowtell, Joanna)
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherElsevieren_GB
dc.relation.urlhttps://doi.org/10.48610/f9416b1en_GB
dc.relation.urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38185062en_GB
dc.rights© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)en_GB
dc.subjectDiet surveysen_GB
dc.subjectLuteinen_GB
dc.subjectMacular pigmenten_GB
dc.subjectQuestionnaireen_GB
dc.subjectValidation studyen_GB
dc.subjectZeaxanthinen_GB
dc.titleNewly developed dietary assessment tools for lutein and zeaxanthin are correlated with 24-hour diet recalls, but are not a valid measure of intake in Australian and United Kingdom adultsen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2024-03-04T09:37:01Z
dc.identifier.issn0306-0632
exeter.place-of-publicationUnited States
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Available on open access from Elsevier via the DOI in this recorden_GB
dc.descriptionData availability statement: The dataset supporting the conclusions of this article is available in the UQeSpace repository and is permitted for reuse with a share alike requirement, https://doi.org/10.48610/f9416b1en_GB
dc.identifier.eissn1879-0739
dc.identifier.journalNutrition Researchen_GB
dc.relation.ispartofNutr Res, 122
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_GB
dcterms.dateAccepted2023-12-19
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2023-12-22
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2024-03-04T09:35:52Z
refterms.versionFCDVoR
refterms.dateFOA2024-03-04T09:42:51Z
refterms.panelCen_GB
refterms.dateFirstOnline2023-12-22


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)