No, the limitation you mentioned is a major one. Since the amount and type of food varies from day to day, assessment on  3-4 occasions is recommended and not just one. Though a single estimate can still help you to understand the dietary pattern in large scale surveys. 

Thank a lot for your answer.

One issue may come from the table of food composition used that may lead to bad estimations, isn't it?

Sophie.

See this article and others by Archer for critique on validity of dietary recall.

Archer E, Pavela G, Lavie CJ. The Inadmissibility of What We Eat in America

and NHANES Dietary Data in Nutrition and Obesity Research and the Scientific

Formulation of National Dietary Guidelines. Mayo Clin Proc. 2015

Jul;90(7):911-26. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2015.04.009. Epub 2015 Jun 9. Review.

PubMed PMID: 26071068; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4527547.

yes, definitely, that is one error, you should take care of. Use only authentic database for calculations. And while doing the survey, try to get authentic data with standardized measures. I also ask my researchers to do a weighment survey on a small sub sample to validate the data. If you can get compositional data on cooked foods  itself, they offer you  a better and realistic estimate.  

Thank a lot for your help to both of you !

Bonjour,

Je vous conseille de faire une enquête alimentaire sur 1 semaine, ce qui me semble être le minimum requis pour évaluer des apports alimentaires.

Concernant l'évaluation des portions, je vous conseille le catalogue photo SU-VI-MAX.

Enfin, pour les valeurs nutritionnelles, je vous conseille d'utiliser la table du CIQUAL.

Mais j'insiste : quelque soit la méthode, ça ne reflétera pas la réalité à 100%.

Je vous mets en pj un article du Pr Romon paru dans les Cahiers de Nutrition et Diététique en 2007 sur les méthodes d'enquête alimentaire.

Quel est votre projet si ce n'est pas indiscret? Peut-être que vous pourriez vous rapprocher du CHU de Bordeaux et des diététicien(ne)s qui y travaillent.

Bonjour Romain,

Les données ont déjà été recueillis, il y a de cela plusieurs années! Je souhaitais connaitre les limites de ce genre de recueil pour leur analyse et leur interprétation. J'apprécie votre intérêt à ma question et le fait de m'avoir envoyé votre document.

Merci,

Sophie

Dans ce cas voyez peut-être à vous rapprocher de l'équipe de Nutri-Net. Ils auront peut-être des éléments de réponses.

hello, I think a food frequency questionnaire will be better as it gives an estimate of habitual intake. Use it but specify foods containing usual sources of your micronutrient

Thanks for your reply Judwin. I have also a food frequency questionnaire on the same sample at the same time. I planned to use it also to describe nutritional profile of my sample.

Dear Sophie

In my opinion, misreporting because of dependency on memory is the major limitations of single-24-h-recall to micronutrients. However it will depend on the purpose of your study. For example if your study purposes is to define average intake of a group (a population) single-24-hour-recall per person, with all days of the week should be equally represented and emphasise sample size of study. 

Furthermore if your study purposes is to estimate the proportion of population "at risk" you can use repeated 24-h-recalls/records/combinations (non-consecutive days). For the evaluation of nutrients intake of population you can evaluate by comparing with EAR (Estimated Average Requirements) cut off. 

According to your answer below, I agree that you also use FFQ, then you can determine 'usual' intakes between individuals by combine it with multiple 24-h-recalls (non-consecutive). You can evaluate by comparing the data result's with EAR cut off. 

I attached some references that may support your questions.

 Wish you success with your study.

http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=566236&fileId=S1368980002000794

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/133/1/232.long

http://www.harvestplus.org/sites/default/files/tech08.pdf

Thanks a lot Adriyan for your rich answer.

Thanks to Adriyan for uploading good articles with good answer

There is a growing debate over the validity and value of data derived from memory-based dietary assessment methods (M-BMs) such as FFQs, food diaries, and 24HRs. My empirically supported position is that all forms of M-BMs are pseudo-scientific, produce non-falsifiable and physiologically implausible data, and should not be used in nutrition research.

Please see the recent 'Controversy & Debate' Series in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology for details:

Archer E, Marlow ML, Lavie CJ. The Fatal Flaws of Food Frequency Questionnaires and Other Memory-Based Dietary Assessment Methods. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2018. Link: Article Controversy and Debate: Memory based Methods Paper 1: The Fa...

Archer E, Marlow ML, Lavie CJ. Controversy and Debate: Memory-Based Dietary Assessment Methods Paper #3. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2018.

Link: Article Controversy and Debate: Memory-Based Dietary Assessment Meth...

Many thanks for your contribution and references.

SOphie.