Validity and test-retest reliability of a short dietary questionnaire to assess intake of saturated fat and free sugars: a preliminary study
ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to conduct a preliminary investigation of the validity and reliability of a short dietary questionnaire designed to assess dietary intake of saturated fat and free sugars. METHODS: Forty students at Macquarie University, aged 17-46 years, completed the Dietary Fat and free Sugar - Short Questionnaire (DFS), a full-length food frequency questionnaire (C-FFQ) and a 4-day diet diary (DD). After a mean (SD) follow-up time of 158 (10) days, 29 participants completed a second administration of the DFS. RESULTS: Correlation coefficients comparing DFS scores with the percentage energy from saturated fat and free sugar assessed by the C-FFQ and DD ranged from 0.35 to 0.71. The intraclass correlation (0.83) was high, indicating good reliability. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the DFS is a valid and reliable measure of saturated fat and free sugar intake. Because it is quick to administer and score, in the public domain, and easy to interpret, it maybe useful as a screener, simple self-check tool or for large-scale epidemiological studies.
- SourceAvailable from: Yvonne Jeanes[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: High intakes of fat have been linked to greater cognitive decline in old age, but such associations may already occur in younger adults. We tested memory and learning in 38 women (25 to 45 years old), recruited for a larger observational study in women with polycystic ovary syndrome. These women varied in health status, though not significantly between cases (n = 23) and controls (n = 15). Performance on tests sensitive to medial temporal lobe function (CANTABeclipse, Cambridge Cognition Ltd, Cambridge, UK), i.e., verbal memory, visuo-spatial learning, and delayed pattern matching (DMS), were compared with intakes of macronutrients from 7-day diet diaries and physiological indices of metabolic syndrome. Partial correlations were adjusted for age, activity, and verbal IQ (National Adult Reading Test). Greater intakes of saturated and trans fats, and higher saturated to unsaturated fat ratio (Sat:UFA), were associated with more errors on the visuo-spatial task and with poorer word recall and recognition. Unexpectedly, higher UFA intake predicted poorer performance on the word recall and recognition measures. Fasting insulin was positively correlated with poorer word recognition only, whereas higher blood total cholesterol was associated only with visuo-spatial learning errors. None of these variables predicted performance on a DMS test. The significant nutrient-cognition relationships were tested for mediation by total energy intake: saturated and trans fat intakes, and Sat:UFA, remained significant predictors specifically of visuo-spatial learning errors, whereas total fat and UFA intakes now predicted only poorer word recall. Examination of associations separately for monounsaturated (MUFA) and polyunsaturated fats suggested that only MUFA intake was predictive of poorer word recall. Saturated and trans fats, and fasting insulin, may already be associated with cognitive deficits in younger women. The findings need extending but may have important implications for public health.Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 12/2013; 7:838. DOI:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00838 · 2.90 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Obesity has been associated with impaired executive functions including working memory. Less explored is the influence of obesity on learning and memory. In the current study we assessed stimulus reward association learning, explicit learning and memory and working memory in healthy weight, overweight and obese individuals. Explicit learning and memory did not differ as a function of group. In contrast, working memory was significantly and similarly impaired in both overweight and obese individuals compared to the healthy weight group. In the first reward association learning task the obese, but not healthy weight or overweight participants consistently formed paradoxical preferences for a pattern associated with a negative outcome (fewer food rewards). To determine if the deficit was specific to food reward a second experiment was conducted using money. Consistent with experiment 1, obese individuals selected the pattern associated with a negative outcome (fewer monetary rewards) more frequently than healthy weight individuals and thus failed to develop a significant preference for the most rewarded patterns as was observed in the healthy weight group. Finally, on a probabilistic learning task, obese compared to healthy weight individuals showed deficits in negative, but not positive outcome learning. Taken together, our results demonstrate deficits in working memory and stimulus reward learning in obesity and suggest that obese individuals are impaired in learning to avoid negative outcomes.Neuropsychologia 10/2014; 65. DOI:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.10.004 · 3.45 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Less sensitive interoception for hunger and fullness has been observed in people who consume a diet rich in saturated fat and added sugar. In this study we examined whether healthy young people who routinely consume such diets, also demonstrate less sensitive thirst interoception. Participants, varying primarily in diet, were made thirsty by consuming salted chips and later provided with ad libitum access to water, with thirst ratings obtained throughout. A self-report measure of interoceptive awareness was also included plus measures to determine eating habits, memory and executive function. A diet reported as richer in saturated fat and added sugar (an HFS diet) was associated both with less sensitive thirst interoception and with greater attention to somatic signs. Evidence of poorer hippocampal-sensitive learning and memory was also detected. Poorer sensitivity to interoceptive cues appears to be a reliable correlate of an HFS diet and its causal origins are discussed. Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier Inc.Physiology & Behavior 11/2014; 139. DOI:10.1016/j.physbeh.2014.11.050 · 3.03 Impact Factor