Relative Validity of Interviewer-Administered 24-Hour Recalls Collected By Telephone and In-person Compared With...

Area of Science:

• Nutrition science
• Public health research
• Dietary assessment methodologies

Background:

• Quantitative dietary assessment faces challenges related to cost, time, and logistics.
• Phone-based 24-hour recall (24HR) presents a potentially advantageous method for data collection, especially in rural settings.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate the criterion and relative validity of phone-based 24HR compared to in-person 24HR.
• To assess the cost-effectiveness of phone-based 24HR versus in-person 24HR.
• To compare these methods against observed weighed food records (WFR) as a reference measure.

Main Methods:

• A randomized crossover design was employed with 103 rural Sri Lankan adults.
• Data collection included phone and in-person 24HR, matched with WFR.
• Agreement was analyzed using equivalence testing and concordance correlation coefficients, with cost analysis via activity-based costing.

Main Results:

• Both phone and in-person 24HR underestimated energy intake compared to WFR, primarily due to portion size misestimation.
• Phone 24HR showed equivalence for energy, protein, and several micronutrients against WFR.
• Phone-based 24HR were more cost-effective ($186/respondent) than in-person 24HR ($254/respondent).

Conclusions:

• Phone-based 24HR are a valid and cost-effective alternative to in-person 24HR for dietary assessment in rural Sri Lankan adults.
• While both methods underestimate true intake, phone 24HR offer comparable accuracy at a lower cost.
• This highlights the potential of phone-based dietary assessment for improving nutritional surveillance in resource-limited areas.