91̽»¨

Dietary Assessment Instrument Inventory

In april 2021, we sent out a questionnaire to the NEON list to create an inventory of available dietary assessment instruments for the Nordic countries.  We received 12 responses.  In Sweden, nine instruments are ready to use (of which eight are validated) and three are still in development.  The majority are food frequency questionnaires (n=5), but other types of (hybrid) instruments are available.  The instruments are suitable for 'the general population', but also instruments suitable for the clinical setting were registered.  You can download the full results (excel spreadsheet) via this link: 

The link to the questionniare to register your dietary assessment instrument will remain open (available via above link).  We aim to update the inventory on a yearly basis.

We hope this inventory will help with resource management and that it will be a source of information for those involved in nutritional/clinical research in the Nordic countries!

 

The DAPA Measurement Toolkit is a free web-based resource to assist researchers, public health professionals, and others to identify and use methods for the assessment of diet, anthropometry, and physical activity. The toolkit is hosted by MRC Epidemiology Unit, Cambridge, U.K.

NCI’s tool for guidance regarding diet assessment method and diet data analysis from NCI. The purpose of the Primer is to help researchers determine the best way to assess diet for any study in which estimates of group intakes are required. This can be a challenge because no perfect measure of diet exists. Understanding the key features of self-report instruments and the benefits and drawbacks of potential approaches to collecting and analyzing dietary intake data can help you make the best choices given your research question and resources. 

The Automated Self-administered 24-hour Recall (ASA24) system is a Web-based tool, developed by investigators at NCI that enables automated self-administered 24-hour recalls. Extensive evidence has demonstrated that 24-hour dietary recalls provide the highest-quality, least biased dietary data. Traditional 24-hour recalls, however, are expensive and impractical for large-scale research because they rely on trained interviewers and multiple administrations to estimate usual intakes. As a result, researchers often make use of food frequency questionnaires, which are less expensive but contain substantial error. The Web-based tool was created to address this challenge.

A series of lectures (broadcasted via internet) during the fall of 2010 from the National Cancer Institute on important issues related to dietary assessment and measurement errors. These lectures including the slides are currently available via the NCI web-site.

RiksmatenFlex

RiksmatenFlex is the web-based dietary assessment method used in the latest national dietary survey – Riksmaten 2016-17. A validation study is published in J Med Internet Res PMC6914230

For further information please contact Datauttag@slv.se

This is a short web-based test for those who want feedback on their dietary habits. it is also a tool for health professionals who want to discuss dietary habits with their patients. 

The Swedish food composition database provides information on the nutritional composition of more than 2000 foods and dishes. The food information is continiously updated. To achieve this, analytical projectsare carried out and details of the projects are published in reports. The food composition database is a free on-line resource. Please cite the source if you use the data. 

More resources

•  (information, data sets)
• (Global Burden of Disease)

DAGitty — draw and analyze causal diagrams

What if Causal Inference: What If Miguel A. Hernan, James M. Robins April 26, 2024

 

Conducting a systematic review:

General tools and guidelines for conducting a systematic reviews:

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) is a free-to-use guide on how to plan, conduct and report your systematic review. The guidelines contain checklists on what to include in the protocol, abstract and the different parts of the paper, along with flow diagrams and other helpful materials. The PRISMA guidelines increase transparency and replicability and are basically considered mandatory for systematic reviews but can also be used for other types of reviews.

 

The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions is the official guide that describes in detail the process of preparing and maintaining Cochrane systematic reviews on the effects of healthcare interventions. The Handbook includes guidance on the standard methods applicable to every review, as well as more specialized topics (non-randomized studies, adverse effects, complex interventions, equity, economics, patient-reported outcomes, individual patient data, prospective meta-analysis, and qualitative research).

 

Tools for screening and data extraction:

There are several tools for screening your search results. Some are simpler tools that are very efficient for small projects, while others are more advanced and better suited for bigger projects. Here are a few examples that can be used.

Rayyan is a simpler tool that only includes title and abstract screening, and full-text screening. For the full-text screening, bulk import of papers is not available, so each pdf must be attached individually. Rayyan might be suitable for smaller systematic reviews or if you only need a tool for abstract screening. Rayyan has a free version for up to 3 active reviews.

 

EPPI-Reviewer is a bit more advanced tool, including title and abstract screening, full-text screening, and data extraction. EPPI-Reviewer does not have a free version.

 

Convince is a more advanced tool, including title and abstract screening, full-text screening, data extraction, and Cochrane risk of bias tools for quality assessment. Covidence does not have a free version.

 

DistillerSR is a more advanced tool that can help you throughout the process of your systematic review, from the search to your report, with an AI-powered screening tool that reduces screening burden by 60%. DistillerSR does not have a free version.

 

 

Tools for Risk of Bias assessment:

There are several tools available for assessing the risk of bias in your systematic review. No single tool fits all systematic reviews, and you need to decide what tool best fits your research question. Here are some recommended tools for risk of bias assessment:

Intervention studies:

Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) assesses the risk of bias in randomized trials, with different versions also available for cluster-randomized trials and crossover-trials.

 

Observational studies:

Risk Of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) is a tool targeting observational studies that assesses the impact of an intervention (e.g., treatments, therapies). Examples include cohort studies assessing long-term follow-up of a treatment, and case-control studies comparing a treatment.

 

Risk Of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies - of Exposures (ROBINS-E) is similar to the ROBINS-I, but with the exception that it targets observational epidemiological studies that examines exposures (e.g., environmental, occupational, or behavioral exposures) and their effects on human health. Examples include cohort studies assessing the impact of a nutrient on a specific disease.

 

The OHAT Risk of Bias Tool applies a parallel approach to the evaluation of study quality for human and non-human animal studies, facilitating consideration of potential bias across evidence streams with common terminology and domains. Might be especially appropriate for toxicological research questions.

 

Tools for Grading the Evidence:

The World Cancer Research Fund has developed a tool for objectively grading the likelihood that dietary, nutritional, or physical activity exposure is causally related to risk of cancer.

 

The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) handbook describes the process of rating the quality of the best available evidence and developing health care recommendations.