|
|||||
|
|
Influence of Using Different Sources of Carotenoid Data in Epidemiologic Studies |
|
| Authors: | GINA M. VANDENLANGENBERG MS RD WILLIAM E. BRADY MS LINDA C. NEBELING PhD MPH RD GLADYS BLOCK PhD MICHELE FORMAN PhD PHYLLIS E. BOWEN PhD MARIA STACEWICZ-SAPUNTZAKIS PhD JULIE A. MARES-PERLMAN PhD RD |
| Affiliation: | a G. M. VandenLangenberg is a doctoral candidate in the departments of Nutritional Sciences and Preventive Medicine/Epidemiology and W. E. Brady is a statistician and J. A. Mares-Perlman is an assistant professor in the Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA b L. C. Nebeling is a Cancer Prevention Fellow and M. R. Forman is a senior-nutritional epidemiologist at the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md., USA c G. Block is a professor of Public Health Nutrition at the University of California, Berkeley, USA d P. E. Bowen is an associate professor and M. Stacewicz-Sapuntzakis is a senior research specialist in the Department of Nutrition and Medical Dietetics at the University of Illinois at Chicago, USA |
| Abstract: | Objective This study compared distributions of carotenoid intake and diet-serum correlations using two sources of carotenoid data: the US Department of Agriculture-National Cancer Institute (USDA-NCI) carotenoid food composition database and values accompanying the Block-NCI Health Habits and History Questionnaire (HHHQ). Design and subjects A 100-item food frequency questionnaire was used to collect dietary data from 2,152 adults, aged 43 to 85 years, who were participating in the Nutritional Factors in Eye Disease Study, a population-based study designed to evaluate nutritional factors associated with age-related eye disease. Blood samples were collected from a random sample of 400 nonfasting participants in the study. Results Median carotenoid intakes using HHHQ vs USDA-NCI data were alpha carotene (229 vs 223 μg/day), beta carotene (1,321 vs 1,325 μg/day), beta cryptoxanthin (72 vs 21 μg/day), lutein + zeaxanthin (653 vs 811 μg/day), and lycopene (593 vs 1,615 μg/day). All paired differences in carotenoid intake were significantly different from zero (Wilcoxon signed-rank, P<.0001). Despite these differences, the two databases similarly ranked individuals according to carotenoid intake: Spearman correlations ranged from .71 (lycopene) to .93 (alpha carotene). Differences between diet-serum correlations (adjusted for energy, body mass index, high density lipoprotein, and total cholesterol) using HHHQ vs USDA-NCI data were minor and not significant (P>.05): alpha carotene (r=.33 vs .32), beta carotene (r=.27 vs .32), beta cryptoxanthin (r=48 vs .53), lutein + zeaxanthin (r=.28 vs .24), and lycopene (r=.29 vs .25). Conclusions Although estimates of carotenoid intake differed significantly, only minor differences in carotenoid rankings and diet-serum correlations were observed using either data source in this population. J Am Diet Assoc. 1996; 96:1271-1275. |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ | |