IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0159834.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Reliability and Validity of Short Online Questionnaires to Measure Fruit and Vegetable Intake in Adults: The Fruit Test and Vegetable Test

Author

Listed:
  • Jolien Plaete
  • Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij
  • Geert Crombez
  • Saidja Steenhuyzen
  • Liesbet Dejaegere
  • Erika Vanhauwaert
  • Maïté Verloigne

Abstract

The first aim of this study was to investigate the stability of the Fruit Test and Vegetable Test over time and whether the Fruit Test and Vegetable Test are capable of measuring fruit and vegetable intake with consistency. Second, the study aimed to examine criterion (concurrent) validity of the Fruit Test and Vegetable Test by testing their agreement with 7-day food diary-derived measures of fruit and vegetable intake. In total 58 adults (31% male, mean age = 30.0±12.09y) completed the Flemish Fruit and Vegetable test by indicating the frequency of days that they ate fruit and vegetables and the number of portions during the past week. Validity was tested by using a 7-day food diary as a golden standard. Adults were asked to register their fruit and vegetable intake daily in a diary during one week. Spearman correlations were measured to compare total intake reported in the Fruit and Vegetable Test and in the 7-day diary. Agreement plots were used to illustrate absolute agreement. Test-retest reliability was evaluated by having participants completing the Fruit Test and Vegetable Test twice. The Fruit Test (ICC = 0.81) and Vegetable Test (ICC = 0.78) showed excellent and substantial reliability. The Fruit Test (ρ = 0.73) and Vegetable Test showed good validity. Agreement plots showed modest variability in differences between vegetable and fruit intake as measured by the Vegetable and Fruit Test and the 7-day food diary. Also a small underestimation of fruit intake in the Fruit test and vegetable intake in the Vegetable test against the 7-day food diary was shown. Based on the results, it is suggested to include portion size pictures and consumption of mixed vegetables to prevent underestimation. To prevent overestimation, it is concluded to add a moderate number of representative fruit and vegetable items, questions on portion size, household sizes with sufficient detail and food items highly tailored to the dietary behaviors and local food items of the population surveyed. The questionnaires can easily be adapted for the use in other diets (e.g. Asian diet), but reliability and validity should then be examined again. Also, validity remains to be tested in other population groups (i.e. low socio economic status groups, other age groups).

Suggested Citation

  • Jolien Plaete & Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij & Geert Crombez & Saidja Steenhuyzen & Liesbet Dejaegere & Erika Vanhauwaert & Maïté Verloigne, 2016. "The Reliability and Validity of Short Online Questionnaires to Measure Fruit and Vegetable Intake in Adults: The Fruit Test and Vegetable Test," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(7), pages 1-12, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0159834
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159834
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0159834
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0159834&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0159834?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0159834. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.