National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

PAPERBACK
price:$34.95
add to cart

HARDBACK
price:$54.95
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment (2000)
Institute of Medicine (IOM)

Citation Manager

. "Appendix D: Assessing the Performance of the EAR Cut-Point Method for Estimating Prevalence." Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2000.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
230
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


DRI DIETARY REFERENCE INTAKES: Applications in Dietary Assessment

Box D-3 Major findings—Distribution of requirements not symmetrical

  • The bias in the estimate of inadequacy that results from application of the EAR cut-point method when the distribution of requirements is skewed can be severe.

  • When skewness exceeds values around 2, the relative bias (estimated prevalence/true prevalence) is very large—over 100 percent.

  • Even though this simulation was limited in scope, results are striking enough for the Uses Subcommittee to recommend that the EAR cut-point method not be used to assess the prevalence of nutrient inadequacy for a nutrient with a skewed requirement distribution.

of 50,000, prevalence of inadequacy was estimated from the population itself. Therefore, the values shown in Table D-1 and in Figure D-19 represent the actual proportion of individuals with intakes below requirements (true prevalence) and the estimate obtained from application of the EAR cut-point method.

The only nutrient for which there is strong evidence indicating a skewed requirement distribution (at the time this report was published) is iron in menstruating women (FAO/WHO, 1988). In recent Institute of Medicine reports on Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs)

TABLE D-1 True Prevalence of Inadequacy and Estimated Prevalence of Inadequacy of Iron Obtained Using the EAR Cut-point Method

Distribution of Requirements

 

Mean

Standard Deviation

Skewness

True Prevalence (%)

Estimated Prevalence (%)

Bias (%)

8.4

0.7

0.62

12

11

1

8.6

1.4

1.32

15

11

4

9.0

2.5

2.51

20

11

9

9.5

3.9

3.15

24

11

13

10.4

6.9

5.73

28

12

16

NOTE: The distribution of usual intakes is fixed to be normal with a mean of 12 mg and a standard deviation of 3 mg.

Page
230
Front Matter (R1-R14)
Contents (R15-R18)
Summary (1-18)
I. Historical Perspective and Background (19-20)
1 Introduction and Background (21-28)
2 Current Uses of Dietary Reference Standards (29-42)
II. Application of DRIs for Individual Diet Assessment (43-44)
3 Using Dietary Reference Intakes for Nutrient Assessment of Individuals (45-70)
III. Application of DRIs for Group Diet Assessment (71-72)
4 Using the Estimated Average Requirement for Nutrient Assessment of Groups (73-105)
5 Using the Adequate Intake for Nutrient Assessment of Groups (106-112)
6 Using the Tolerable Upper Intake Level for Nutrient Assessment of Groups (113-126)
7 Specific Applications: Assessing Nutrient Intakes of Groups Using the Dietary Reference Intakes (127-144)
IV. Fine-Tuning Dietary Assessment Using the DRIs (145-146)
8 Minimizing Potential Errors in Assessing Group and Individual Intakes (147-161)
9 Research Recommended to Improve the Uses of Dietary Reference Intakes (162-167)
10 References (168-178)
Appendix A: Origin and Framework of the Development of Dietary Reference Intakes (179-184)
Appendix B: Nutrient Assessment of Individuals: Statistical Foundations (185-202)
Appendix C: Assessing Prevalence of Inadequate Intakes for Groups: Statistical Foundations (203-210)
Appendix D: Assessing the Performance of the EAR Cut-Point Method for Estimating Prevalence (211-231)
Appendix E: Units of Observation: Assessing Nutrient Adequacy Using Household and Population Data (232-238)
Appendix F: Rationale for Setting Adequate Intakes (239-253)
Appendix G: Glossary and Abbreviations (254-261)
Appendix H: Biographical Sketches of Subcommittee Members (262-266)
Index (267-281)
Summary Table: Estimated Average Requirements (282-283)
Summary Table: Tolerable Upper Intake Levels (284-286)
Summary Table: Recommended Intakes for Individuals (287-289)