Children's school-breakfast reports and school-lunch reports (in 24-h dietary recalls): conventional and reporting-error-sensitive measures show inconsistent accuracy results for retention interval and breakfast location.

Validation-study data were analysed to investigate retention interval (RI) and prompt effects on the accuracy of fourth-grade children's reports of school-breakfast and school-lunch (in 24-h recalls), and the accuracy of school-breakfast reports by breakfast location (classroom; cafeteria). Randomly selected fourth-grade children at ten schools in four districts were observed eating school-provided breakfast and lunch, and were interviewed under one of eight conditions created by crossing two RIs ('short'--prior-24-hour recall obtained in the afternoon and 'long'--previous-day recall obtained in the morning) with four prompts ('forward'--distant to recent, 'meal name'--breakfast, etc., 'open'--no instructions, and 'reverse'--recent to distant). Each condition had sixty children (half were girls). Of 480 children, 355 and 409 reported meals satisfying criteria for reports of school-breakfast and school-lunch, respectively. For breakfast and lunch separately, a conventional measure--report rate--and reporting-error-sensitive measures--correspondence rate and inflation ratio--were calculated for energy per meal-reporting child. Correspondence rate and inflation ratio--but not report rate--showed better accuracy for school-breakfast and school-lunch reports with the short RI than with the long RI; this pattern was not found for some prompts for each sex. Correspondence rate and inflation ratio showed better school-breakfast report accuracy for the classroom than for cafeteria location for each prompt, but report rate showed the opposite. For each RI, correspondence rate and inflation ratio showed better accuracy for lunch than for breakfast, but report rate showed the opposite. When choosing RI and prompts for recalls, researchers and practitioners should select a short RI to maximise accuracy. Recommendations for prompt selections are less clear. As report rates distort validation-study accuracy conclusions, reporting-error-sensitive measures are recommended.

Effectiveness of Prompts on Fourth-Grade Children's Dietary Recall Accuracy Depends on Retention Interval and Varies by Gender.

BACKGROUND: Dietary recall accuracy is related to retention interval (RI) (i.e., time between to-be-reported meals and the interview), and possibly to prompts. To the best of our knowledge, no study has evaluated their combined effect. OBJECTIVE: The combined influence of RI and prompts on children's recall accuracy was investigated in this study. Two RIs [short (prior-24-h recall obtained in afternoon) and long (previous-day recall obtained in morning)] were crossed with 4 prompts [forward (distant-to-recent), meal-name (breakfast, lunch, etc.), open (no instructions), and reverse (recent-to-distant)], creating 8 conditions. METHODS: Fourth-grade children (n = 480; 50% girls) were randomly selected from consenting children at 10 schools in 4 districts in a southern state during 3 school years (2011-2012, 2012-2013, and 2013-2014). Each child was observed eating school-provided breakfast and lunch, and interviewed one time under 1 of the 8 conditions. Condition assignment was constrained so that each had 60 children (30 girls). Accuracy measures were food-item omission and intrusion rates, and energy correspondence rate and inflation ratio. For each measure, linear models determined effects of RI, prompt, gender, and interactions (2-way, 3-way); race/ethnicity, school year, and district were control variables. RESULTS: RI (P values < 0.015) and prompt (P values < 0.005) were significant for all 4 accuracy measures. RI × prompt (P values < 0.001) was significant for 3 accuracy measures (not intrusion rate). Prompt × gender (P = 0.005) was significant for omission rate. RI × prompt × gender was significant for intrusion rate and inflation ratio (P values < 0.001). For the short vs. long RI across prompts and genders, accuracy was better by 33-50% for each accuracy measure. CONCLUSIONS: To obtain the most accurate recalls possible from children, studies should be designed to use a short rather than long RI. Prompts affect children's recall accuracy, although the effectiveness of different prompts depends on RI and varies by gender: at a short RI, the choice of prompts has little systematic effect on accuracy, whereas at a long RI, reverse prompts may elicit the most accurate recalls.

Children's Social Desirability: Effects of Test Assessment Mode.

This study examined a recently developed short version of the Children's Social Desirability (CSD-S) scale with 157 fourth-grade children. Of interest was a) whether one-month test-retest reliability would vary as a function of test assessment mode (interview or classroom), gender, race, SES, and BMI percentile, and b) whether the degree of social desirability would vary as a function of these same variables. The CSD-S scale showed good test-retest reliability for both interview and classroom assessment modes (.85 and .83, respectively). Internal consistency also was good (first interview administration = .84; first classroom administration = .81). Reliability was good and did not vary significantly over assessment mode or any child subgroup variables, suggesting that the CSD-S scale is appropriate for general use. The interview mode elicited significantly more socially desirable answers than did the classroom mode. Social desirability did not differ across child subgroups. Some of these findings were examined, and replicated, on another sample. Thus, the CSD-S scale may be used with diverse groups of children to a) reliably assess a social desirability bias that may systematically bias other self-reports of interest to researchers and b) examine individual differences in degree of social desirability.

Retention Interval and Prompts: Creation and Cross-Sectional Pilot-Testing of Eight Interview Protocols to Obtain 24-Hour Dietary Recalls from Fourth-Grade Children.

BACKGROUND: Any 24-hour dietary recall (24hDR) has a retention interval and prompts. No research has investigated their combined effect. OBJECTIVE: Eight 24hDR protocols, constructed by crossing two retention intervals (prior-24-hour recall obtained in afternoon and previous-day recall obtained in morning) with four prompts (forward [distant-to-recent], reverse [recent-to-distant], meal-name [eg, breakfast, lunch, etc], and open [no instructions]), were pilot-tested. DESIGN: Via a cross-sectional design, children were interviewed once, using one of eight 24hDR protocols. PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: Forty-eight fourth-grade children (79% black; 50% girls; six per protocol) were randomly selected from two schools during spring 2011. Protocol assignment was random. Analyses excluded one interview due to protocol deviation. STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED: Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) with four nonaccuracy-related response variables was conducted, with independent variables retention interval, prompt, and their interaction. The significance level was 0.10 due to the study's exploratory nature. RESULTS: The response variable set differed across retention intervals (P=0.0003) and prompts (P=0.045) but not their interaction (P=0.11). Follow-up analysis of variance for each of four variables showed differences by retention interval for three and prompt for two: Interview length (minutes) differed by retention interval (prior-24-hour-afternoon=21.8, previous-day-morning=16.1; P<0.0008) and prompt (open=20.3, reverse=20.0, forward=19.1, and meal-name=16.3; P=0.079). Number of school meals reported eaten during the target period did not depend on retention interval or prompt, but was greater using meal-name prompts (1.7) than the other three prompts (1.3; P=0.055; contrast t test). Number of 10 possible meal components reported eaten at school meals differed by retention interval (prior-24-hour-afternoon=4.1, previous-day-morning=2.9; P=0.048). Weighted number of items (condiment=0.33, combination entrée=2.0, and else=1.0) reported eaten at school meals differed by retention interval (prior-24-hour-afternoon=5.8, previous-day-morning=4.1; P=0.079) and prompt (forward=6.2, meal-name=5.3, reverse=4.9, and open=3.3; P=0.093). CONCLUSIONS: Children's nonaccuracy-related responses to eight 24hDR protocols varied as hypothesized. The selected protocols will be useful in a planned validation study to investigate differences by protocol in children's recall accuracy.

A validation study concerning the effects of interview content, retention interval, and grade on children's recall accuracy for dietary intake and/or physical activity.

BACKGROUND: Practitioners and researchers are interested in assessing children's dietary intake and physical activity together to maximize resources and minimize subject burden. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to investigate differences in dietary and/or physical activity recall accuracy by content (diet only; physical activity only; diet and physical activity), retention interval (same-day recalls in the afternoon; previous-day recalls in the morning), and grade (third; fifth). DESIGN: Children (n=144; 66% African American, 13% white, 12% Hispanic, 9% other; 50% girls) from four schools were randomly selected for interviews about one of three contents. Each content group was equally divided by retention interval, each equally divided by grade, each equally divided by sex. Information concerning diet and physical activity at school was validated with school-provided breakfast and lunch observations, and accelerometry, respectively. Dietary accuracy measures were food-item omission and intrusion rates, and kilocalorie correspondence rate and inflation ratio. Physical activity accuracy measures were absolute and arithmetic differences for moderate to vigorous physical activity minutes. STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED: For each accuracy measure, linear models determined effects of content, retention interval, grade, and their two-way and three-way interactions; ethnicity and sex were control variables. RESULTS: Content was significant within four interactions: intrusion rate (content×retention-interval×grade; P=0.0004), correspondence rate (content×grade; P=0.0004), inflation ratio (content×grade; P=0.0104), and arithmetic difference (content×retention-interval×grade; P=0.0070). Retention interval was significant for correspondence rate (P=0.0004), inflation ratio (P=0.0014), and three interactions: omission rate (retention-interval×grade; P=0.0095), intrusion rate, and arithmetic difference (both already mentioned). Grade was significant for absolute difference (P=0.0233) and five interactions mentioned. Content effects depended on other factors. Grade effects were mixed. Dietary accuracy was better with same-day than previous-day retention interval. CONCLUSIONS: Results do not support integrating dietary intake and physical activity in children's recalls, but do support using shorter rather than longer retention intervals to yield more accurate dietary recalls. Additional validation studies need to clarify age effects and identify evidence-based practices to improve children's accuracy for recalling dietary intake and/or physical activity.