Pros and cons


Pros

  • Low respondent burden - typically take 10-20 minutes to complete
  • Assess habitual consumption over an extended period of time
  • Comparatively easy to administer and have a low cost compared to other dietary assessment methods
  • May be self administered via mail or the Internet
  • Used to assess habitual consumption over an extended period of time
  • More complete data may be collected if the FFQ is interviewer administered but respondent bias may be less if self-administered
  • Can be used to gather information on a range of foods or designed to be shorter and focus on foods rich in a specific nutrient or a particular group of foods e.g. fruit and vegetables
  • Portion size estimates can be used to obtain absolute nutrient intakes
  • Inclusion of an open section allows respondents to record consumption of foods not included on the food list
  • Separate sections can be included that ask about consumption of seasonal items, cooking and preparation methods and additions to foods, including sauces and condiments
  • The standardisation of responses enables FFQs to be analysed relatively quickly
  • Computer-readable forms can be scanned into computers reducing data-entry errors
  • Existing FFQs can be modified for use in new studies if the analysis package is available

 Cons

  • A comprehensive list of all foods eaten cannot be included and reported intake is limited to the foods contained in the food list
  • Accurate reporting relies on respondent memory
  • Bias may be introduced with respondents reporting eating ‘good’ foods more frequently (over-estimation) or the consumption of ‘bad’ foods less often (under-estimation)
  • A relatively high degree of literacy and numeracy skills are required if self administered, although less than other methods; interviewers can help overcome this problem
  • Estimating portion sizes may be difficult and the use of small, medium and large to describe portion size may not have a commonly accepted meaning
  • Self-administered FFQs may not be completed fully; some respondents may only complete the questionnaire for items they are familiar with
  • Problems with interpreting questions may arise with self-administered FFQs
  • FFQs developed in one country or for a specific subpopulation are unlikely to be appropriate for use in another country unless dietary habits are very similar
  • The food list may not be reflective of the dietary patterns of the population to be studied; ethnic differences in a population may not be captured for example.
  • Pre-prepared meals such as ready meals or take-away foods may not be easy for respondents to classify if the food list is based on more basic food categories
  • Validity can vary widely between foods and nutrients from the same FFQ
  • Grouping of foods into individual items may make answering some questions problematic

Web design by Studio 24