Comparison of meal patterns across five European countries using standardized 24-h recall (GloboDiet) data from the EFCOVAL project

PURPOSE

To examine meal patterns in terms of frequency and circadian timing of eating in five European countries participating in the EFCOVAL project.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, 559 men and women, aged 44-65 years, were recruited in Belgium, the Czech Republic, France (Southern part), The Netherlands, and Norway. Dietary data were collected by trained interviewers using standardized computerised 24-h recalls (GloboDiet). Means ± SE of (1) eating frequency, (2) overnight fasting, and (3) time between eating occasions were estimated by country using means from 2 days of 24-h recalls. We also estimated the frequency of eating occasions per hour by country as well as the proportional energy intake of meals/snacks by country compared to the mean energy intake of all countries.

RESULTS

Mean eating frequency ranged from 4.3 times/day in France to 7.1 times/day in The Netherlands (p < 0.05). Mean overnight fasting was shortest in the Netherlands (9.2 h) and longest in Czech Republic (10.9 h) (p < 0.05). Mean time between single eating occasions was shortest in The Netherlands (2.4 h) and longest in France (4.3 h) (p < 0.05). Different patterns of energy intake by meals and snacks throughout the day were observed across the five countries.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed distinct differences in meal patterns across the five European countries included in the current study in terms of frequency and circadian timing of eating, and the proportion of energy intake from eating occasions.

Comparison of estimated energy intake from 2×24-hour recalls and a seven-day food record with objective measurements of energy expenditure in children

Objective

The objective of the present study was to evaluate energy intake (EI) estimated from two non-consecutive 24-hour recalls (24-HDRs) and a pre-coded seven-day food record (7-dFR) against objective measurements of energy expenditure (EE) in children.

Design

A total of 67 7–8 year-olds and 64 12–13 year-olds completed the 2×24-HDRs, the 7-dFR, and wore ActiReg^® (PreMed AS, Oslo, Norway), a combined position and motion recording instrument, during the same seven days as the 7-dFR was filled in.

Results

In the 7–8 year-olds, EI from the 2×24-HDRs (EI_2×24-HDR) was overestimated with 3% compared to EE (not significantly different), while EI from the 7-dFR (EI_7-dFR) was underestimated with 7% compared to EE (P=0.001). In the 12–13 year-olds, the corresponding figures was underestimation by 10% with the 2×24-HDRs (P<0.001) and by 20% with the 7-dFR (P<0.001). For both age groups combined, the 95% limits of agreement were −4·38 and 3.52 MJ/d for the 2×24-HDRs, and −5.90 and 2.94 MJ/d for the 7-dFR. Pearson correlation coefficients between EI and EE were 0.51 for EI_2×24-HDR and 0.29 for EI_7-dFR, respectively. The proportion classified in the same or adjacent quartiles was 76% for EI_2×24-HDR and 73% for EI_7-dFR in the 7–8 year-olds, and 83% for EI_2×24-HDR and 70% for EI_7-dFR in the 12–13 year-olds.

Conclusion

Misreporting of EI seemed modest with both the 2×24-HDRs and the 7-dFR in the 7–8 year-olds when compared to EE measured with ActiReg^®. Under-reporting appeared to be more evident in the 12–13 year-olds, especially with the 7-dFR. Compared to measurements of EE, the 2×24-HDRs seemed to perform slightly better than the 7-dFR in terms of ranking of individuals according to EI.