In-Person Versus Telephone Administered Multiple-Pass 24-Hour Recalls: Validation with Doubly Labeled Water

Abstract As the costs of large dietary surveys increase, mere is a need for cost effective survey methods. Telephone administered interviews are more cost effective in comparison with in-person interviews. The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of energy intakes (El) obtained with the multiple pass 24-hour recall (MP24R) in women using bom in-person and telephone administered interviews. Doubly labeled water (DLW) measurements of total energy expenditure (TEE) were used for validation. When subjects are in energy balance (not losing or gaining mass), TEE can be used as a reference standard because energy intake should be equivalent to energy expenditure. Thirty-five, low-income, weight stable women (mean age 30, range 19-46) participated in this study. Four MP24R were reported by the subjects (two in-person, two by telephone) using two-dimensional food models to estimate portion sizes over the 14-day DLW period TEE was measured over the same period using DLW. Tne recalls were analyzed using the Food Intake Analysis System (FIAS3). No significant difference in mean El was found between the telephone and in-person MP24Rs (Mean ± SD=2,253 ± 688 and 2,173 ± 656 kcals respectively). However, the mean Els from me telephone and in-person MP24Rs were both significantly lower than TEE (Mean ± SD = 2,644 ± 503 kcal)(p