National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Appendix H: Biographical Sketches of Subcommittee Members
Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×

Index

A

Acute exposure, 254

Adequacy of nutrient intake

confidence levels, 6, 56-57, 60, 64-65, 67, 68, 189-190, 197, 199, 200

criteria of, 23, 27

defined, 254

household level, 233-234

in individual-level assessments, 6, 56-57, 60, 64-65, 67, 68, 189-190, 197, 199, 200

observed difference and, 187

probability of correct conclusion about, 190, 199

risk-reduction based indicator of, 2, 23, 27

uncertainty in, 186, 188-189

Adequate Intakes (AIs).

See also specific nutrients

adaptations in, 26

applicable population, 26

context for use, 23, 24, 25, 111

defined, 3, 106, 239, 254

derivation of, 25, 26, 27, 106-109

EARs compared, 59, 109, 163, 198

extrapolation from other age groups, 26

and food guides, 38

in group-level assessments, 4, 12, 106, 109-112

and group mean intake, 6, 12, 107, 108, 110, 111, 131

indicators used to set, 27, 107-109

in individual-level assessments, 4, 6-7, 46, 51, 58-62, 67, 68, 69, 194, 198-200

limitations in dietary assessment, 4, 109-112

methods used to set, 239-253

misuse of, 111-112

nutrients, by life-stage groups, 107-109, 240-253, 274-275

and prevalence of inadequate intakes, 12, 109-110

pseudo EAR calculated from, 111-112

qualitative interpretation of intakes relative to, 62

RDAs compared, 26-27, 59, 109, 198

risk of inadequacy, 59

uses, 25, 30

usual intakes above or below, 46, 59-60, 110, 126

Adjusted standardized intakes, 137

Adjusting intake distributions

day-to-day correlation in data and, 9, 96, 196-197

heterogeneous within-person variation and, 95

Iowa State University method, 98-102, 160

Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×

large within-person variation and, 94-95

National Research Council method, 93-94, 97-98, 100

overview of methods, 9-10, 96-102

reasons for, 9, 94-96

skewed distributions and, 46, 61-62, 95-96

software development needs, 167

from survey data, 96, 128

Adolescents, 14 through 18 years

AIs, 26, 107

household-level assessments, 234

RDAs, 26

within-subject variation in nutrient intake, 192, 194

Adults, 19 through 50 years

AIs, 25, 107

extrapolation of data to other age groups, 26

household-level assessments, 234

within-subject variation in nutrient intake, 191, 193

Adults, 51 through 70 years

AIs, 25, 107

within-subject variation in nutrientn intake, 191, 193

Adults, >70 years

assessing diet of individuals, 66-67, 68

within-subject variation in nutrient intake, 191, 193

Anthropometry, 47, 66, 89

Assessment. See Group-level assessments;

Individual-level assessments

Assisted living setting, individual-level assessments in, 66-67, 68

Asymmetrical distribution. See Skewed distribution

B

B vitamins, 42.

See also individual vitamins

Basal requirement, 22

Behavioral research, 17, 164

Beltsville One Year Dietary Survey, 195

Bias

in adjusted standardized intakes, 137

in cut-point method, 88, 91, 93, 214, 215, 216, 221-223, 224, 227, 230

defined, 254-255

EAR and, 53n.1, 54, 56, 93-102

in energy intakes, 164

in food intake estimation, 17, 164

in observed mean intakes, 58

in prevalence of inadequacy, 86, 88, 91, 99, 102, 155, 156, 160, 207, 214, 215, 216, 221-223, 224, 227

requirement distribution and, 197

Biochemical indices, 47, 73, 99, 166

Biological parameters, in individual-level assessments, 47, 66, 67, 69

Biotin

AIs, 25, 108, 109, 250-251, 275

group-level assessments, 10-11, 73, 82-83, 108

Body mass index, 89

Body weight, and DRIs, 148

C

Calcium

AIs, 25, 51, 107, 108, 240-243, 274

group-level assessments, 10-11, 73, 82-83, 107, 108

individual-level assessments, 60-61, 68, 198

prevalence of excess intakes, 14-15, 130, 131, 142-143

prevalence of inadequate intakes, 14-15

skewed intake distributions, 95

supplements, 95

ULs, 115, 130, 131, 270

usual nutrient intakes of children, 129, 130

within-subject variation in intake, 191, 192

Canada

Council on Nutrition, 2, 30

Food Guide to Healthy Eating, 33, 38

nutrition assistance programs, 39

Canadian International Development

Agency, 234

Canadian Recommended Nutrient Intakes

defined, 257

DRIs contrasted, 22-23

RDAs contrasted, 2, 30

uses, 30, 31-42, 127

Carbohydrates, 193-194

Carotenes, 56, 126, 158, 191, 192, 197

Child and Adult Care Feeding Program, 35

Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×

Children, ages 1 through 8 years.

See also Life-stage groups;

individual nutrients

AIs, 26, 107, 129

characteristics of usual nutrient intake, 129

derivation of DRIs for, 26

EARs, 129

RDAs, 26, 129

within-subject variation in nutrient intake, 192, 194

Cholesterol, 193-194

Choline

AIs, 25, 108, 109, 250-251, 275

group-level assessments, 10-11, 73, 82-83, 108

prevalence of excess intakes, 14-15, 131, 142-143

ULs, 116-117, 131, 271

Chronic disease risk reduction

food health claims, 41

as indicator of nutrient adequacy, 2, 23

Chronic exposure, 255

Chronic intakes above ULs, 63, 125, 126

Clinical dietetics, 36-37, 41, 47

Cluster analysis, 133, 255

Coefficient of variation

of daily intake, 63, 67, 191-194, 196, 200

in EARs, 50-51, 56, 194, 196

and nonnormal distribution, 196

of requirements for nutrients, 83, 197

Confidence levels

in group-level adequacy of intakes, 12, 110

in group-level safety of intakes, 122

in individual-level adequacy of intakes, 6, 56-57, 60, 64-65, 67, 68, 189-190, 197, 199, 200

in individual-level safety of intakes, 199, 201

Continuing Survey of Food Intakes of Individuals (CSFII), 53, 54-55, 58, 61, 64, 65, 153, 166, 195-196, 199

Copper, 191, 192

Criterion of nutritional adequacy, 23, 25, 27

Critical adverse affect, by nutrient and life-stage group, 115-119

Cumulative distribution function, 205

Cut-point method, 120

accuracy, 81

applicable nutrients, 10-11, 82-83, 91

assumptions in, 9, 11, 167, 211

asymmetrical requirement distribution, 89-91, 212, 229-231

bias in, 88, 91, 93, 214, 215, 216, 221-223, 224, 227, 230

correlated intakes and requirements and, 81, 87-89, 212-224

defined, 255, 257

distribution of usual intakes, 131, 212, 213

EAR and, 74, 81-93, 99, 191, 208-231, 257

energy intakes and, 81, 88-89, 212, 224

FAO/WHO simulation model, 229-231

inapplicable nutrients, 81, 88-89, 91, 224

independence of intakes and requirements, 81, 83-84, 85, 86, 88

joint distribution in, 83-84, 85, 86, 204, 208, 209, 213

performance assessment, 18, 87, 102, 167, 211-231

prevalence of inadequate intakes, 18, 81-82, 86, 99, 104, 167, 209-210, 213, 214-221, 225-226, 230

principle, 208-209, 232

probability approach compared, 208, 209, 212, 213, 229, 231

requirement distribution and, 11 81, 83, 86, 89-91, 163, 208, 209, 212, 229-231

requirement variance relative to intake variance, 11, 83, 86, 91-93, 167, 212, 224-229

uncertainty in, 158-159

D

Daily Value (DV), 41

Deficiency, defined, 255

Defined nutritional states, 25, 106

Density estimation See Nutrient density approach.

Diagnostic considerations, 47

Diet histories, 49-50, 58, 152-153

Diet planning, 2, 30

Diet software programs, 47

Dietary assessment.

See also Group-level assessments;

Individual-level assessments

information sources for, 45

with RDAs and RNIs, 2, 30-31, 32-33

Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×

Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 33

Dietary intake data.

See also Dietary survey data;

Measuring dietary intakes;

Observed intakes;

Usual intakes of nutrients

accuracy of nutrient analysis of, 46-47

collection, 49-50, 60, 94, 96, 99, 151-154, 159, 164, 235

factors influencing, 48, 150, 163

for household-level assessments, 104, 156-157, 235-236

for individual assessments, 49-50, 54

interpretation of, 51

quality of, 17, 163-165

RDAs and RNIs, 32-33, 38

research recommendations, 163-165

under-reporting, 17, 48, 58, 153-154, 160, 164

usual intake reflected in, 60

Dietary records

one-day, 10, 99-100, 101-102, 127-128

three-day, 54, 56, 94, 200

nonconsecutive days, 94, 127-128

seven-day, 67

weighed food, 153

Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs)

age and, 149

adjustment for specific individuals and populations, 41, 147-150, 163

applicable population, 3, 22, 26, 41

applications in individual-level assessments, 4, 46, 66-69

availability and reliability of data, 27

body weight and, 148

categories;

see Adequate Intakes;

Estimated Average Requirements;

Recommended Dietary Allowances;

Tolerable Upper Intake Levels

characteristics of usual nutrient intake by, 129

criteria for, 3-4, 22, 27

defined, 1, 22, 256

describing dietary survey data with, 14-15, 127, 128-129

effects of variation in, 23

energy intake and, 149-150, 163

framework, 3-4, 182

group-level applications of, 2, 4, 7-13, 14-15, 127-143

individual-level applications of, 2, 4, 46, 66-69

origin, 2, 179-180

parameters for, 181-184;

see also Lifestage groups;

Reference heights and weights

physiological stage and, 149

properties of, 26

RDAs and RNIs contrasted, 2-3, 22-23

risk of inadequacy, 24

single-endpoint approach, 3-4, 22

uncertainty in, 27

Dietary reference standards

changes over time, 2, 29-31

choosing for individuals, 50-51

conceptual framework, 2, 30-31

current uses, 29-42

defined, 255

primary applications, 2, 29-30

users, 31

Dietary status, defined, 255

Dietary survey data

adjusting intake distributions, 96, 128

describing, 14-15, 127, 128-129

distribution of usual intakes from, 10, 14-15, 96, 127-128, 133-134, 142-143, 205-206

evaluating, 14-15, 127, 128, 132-143

and group-level assessments, 10, 96, 98-102, 128-129, 132-143

pooling for standard deviation in intakes, 53, 54-55, 58, 64, 65, 195-196, 198-199, 200, 201-202

sample size considerations, 98-99

sampling weights, 96, 133

Disease risk assessment, 36-37, 40

Distribution of observed intakes.

See also Adjusting intake distributions

defined, 256

and individual-level assessments, 61-62, 190, 198-199, 201

skewed/asymmetrical, 56, 61-62, 95-96, 190, 196, 197, 201

usual intake distribution estimated from, 94

variance of, 94

Distribution of requirements.

See also Joint distribution of intake and requirement;

Nutrient requirements

and bias, 197

and cut-point method, 11, 81, 83, 86, 89-91, 163, 208, 209, 212, 229-231

Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×

defined, 256

log normal, 91, 229-231

normal/symmetrical, 74, 77, 81, 190, 205n.1, 207, 208

skewed/asymmetrical, 46, 50-51, 57, 67, 80, 81, 89-91, 197, 207, 212, 229-231

variance of, 8, 53n.1, 162-163, 188

Distribution of usual intakes.

See also Adjusting intake distributions;

Joint distribution of intake and requirement

characteristics of, 14-15, 128-129

defined, 256

EAR cut-point method mad, 131, 212, 213

for group-level assessments, 94, 99-102, 155

multiple regression analyses of, 133, 134-140

from observed intake, 94

from one day of intake data, 99-100, 101-102

and prevalence of inadequate intakes, 14-15, 130-131, 135-139

regression-adjusted differences in means, 135

from replicate intake data, 99-100

risk curve and, 78-80, 121, 205-206, 208

skewed, 95-96, 209

software for estimating, 160

spread/variance, 93

in subpopulations, 14-15, 132-139, 142-143

supplement use and, 155, 164

from survey data, 10, 14-15, 96, 127-128, 133-134, 142-143, 205-206

ULs and, 13, 120-121, 130-131

univariate, 76-77, 209

Dose-response assessment, 13, 114, 121, 124, 256

E

Energy intakes

bias related to, 164

cut-point method applied to, 81, 88-89, 212, 224

and dietary intake measurements, 152, 153, 160

and DRIs, 149-150, 163

group-level assessments, 132

group mean intake, 103, 132

household-level assessments and, 232-233, 234, 235

inappropriate measures for, 15, 81, 88-89, 143, 224

phosphorus and, 63-64

and population level assessments, 236, 237

requirement correlation, 81, 87, 88-89, 212

weight as measure of, 66-67, 69

within-person variability, 95, 156, 193-194, Error. See Measurement error

Estimated Average Requirements (EARs)

adjustments to, 148, 149-150

AIs compared, 59, 109, 163, 198

coefficient of variation, 50-51, 56, 194, 196

context for use, 23

criteria of adequacy, 23, 27

cut-point method, 9, 74, 81-93, 99, 102, 104, 191, 208-231, 257

defined, 3, 23, 50, 256

dietary intake distribution adjustments, 53n.1, 54, 56, 93-102

in food and nutrition assistance programs, 39

in group-level assessment, 4, 8-9, 10-11, 12, 73-105, 130-131, 204

group-mean intakes and, 12, 103-104

in individual-level assessments, 4, 5-6, 46, 50-51, 52-58, 59, 67, 68, 69, 185, 186-197

median vs. mean intake, 23 n.1

by nutrient and life-stage group, 268-269

probability approach, 8-9, 74, 76-81, 83-84, 88-89, 91, 205-208, 209, 212, 213, 229, 231

rationale for term, 23 n.1

and RDA, 23, 24, 25, 54, 56, 103

research needs, 16-17, 162-163

risk of inadequacy, 24

standard deviation of intake for individual, 24, 52-53, 54, 195-196

uncertainty in, 27, 159-160

uses, 30, 42

variability related to, 50, 159-160

Expected risk of inadequacy, 206

Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×

F

Fat, 193-194

Fiber, dietary, 193-194

Fluoride

AIs, 25, 107, 108, 109, 246-247, 274

distribution of usual intake, 121

group-level assessments, 10-11, 82-83, 108

prevalence of inadequate intakes, 10-11, 73, 110

prevalence of excess intakes, 14-15, 131, 142-143

ULs, 115, 131, 270

Folate

EARs, 14-15, 129, 269

FAO/WHO requirement, 22

food fortification, 42

group-level assessments, 10-11, 82-83, 108, 131-132

individual-level assessments, 68, 191, 192

and neural tube defects, 26, 27, 69

and pregnancy planning, 69

prevalence of inadequate intakes, 14-15, 130, 131-132, 142-143

RDAs, 129, 131-132, 275

risk of excessive intake, 14-15, 121, 124, 142-143

subgroup differences, 14-15, 142-143

supplement intake distribution, 121, 124

ULs, 14-15, 117, 271

usual intake by children, 129, 130, 131-132

within-subject variation in intake, 191, 192

Food and Agriculture Organization/ World Health Organization, 22, 89, 91, 229-231, 232-233, 234

Food and nutrition assistance programs, 34-35, 39, 166

Food balance sheets, 236-237

Food composition data, 17, 152, 154, 157, 160, 164

Food consumption

household data, 104

patterns, 32-33, 152

Food disappearance data, 104, 157, 236-237, 255-256

Food-frequency questionnaires, 49, 58, 151-152

Food Guide Pyramid, 33, 38, 157

Food guides, 32-33, 38, 58

Food labeling and nutritional marketing, 36-37, 41

Food product development, 36-37, 42

Food safety considerations, 36-37, 42

Food Stamp Program, 35, 39, 133-139

Food use data, 235-236

Fortification of foods, 26

household-level assessment and, 234-235

mandatory in U.S., 42

measuring nutrient intakes from, 164-165

RDAs and RNIs used for, 36-37, 39, 42

and ULs, 26, 124, 125, 201

voluntary, 42

G

Gender, within-subject variation in nutrient intake by, 191-194

Group diets, 30

Group-level assessments

adjusting intake distributions, 9-10, 93-102

AIs used in, 4, 12, 106, 109-112

applications of DRIs in, 4, 7-13, 14-15, 127-143

asymmetrical requirement distribution, 89-91, 212, 229-231

binary variables used for inadequacy, 140

collection of dietary intake data for, 9, 94, 96

counting individuals with inadequate intakes, 9, 74, 75, 102, 110

cut-point method, 9, 74, 81-93, 99, 102, 110, 191, 204, 208-231, 257

data other than intakes used in, 73, 89, 99

day-to-day variability in intake and, 9, 94-95, 96, 97-98, 102, 139

differences in nutrient intakes, 132-140

distribution of usual intakes, 94, 99-102, 155

EARs used in, 4, 8-9, 10-11, 73-105, 130-131, 204

evaluating dietary survey data, 132-143

inappropriate approaches, 102-104

Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×

independence of intakes and requirements, 81, 83-84, 85, 86, 88

individual-to-individual variation of intakes and, 8, 93, 94, 95, 96, 134

joint distribution in, 83-84, 85, 86, 204, 208, 209, 213

mean intakes and, 12, 103-104, 134, 138-139

observed mean intakes and, 12, 96, 97

prevalence of excessive intakes, 14-15, 42, 130, 131, 142-143, 154-155

prevalence of inadequate intakes, 8, 12, 73-74, 76-81, 86, 87-89, 94, 99, 101, 102, 109-110, 129-132, 135-139, 203-210, 213, 214-221, 225-226

probability approach, 8-9, 74, 76-81, 83-84, 88-89, 91, 205-208, 209, 212, 213, 229, 231

RDAs and, 4, 11, 24, 102-104, 131

requirement distribution and, 8, 11, 81, 83, 86, 89-91, 208, 209

requirement–intake correlation, 8, 9, 74, 81, 87-89, 203-204, 212-224

requirement variance relative to intake variance, 11, 12, 83, 86, 91-93, 212, 224-229

research recommendations, 16-17, 165-167

skewed intake distribution and, 95-96

survey data and, 10, 14-15, 96, 98-102, 128-129, 132-143

ULs used in, 4, 13, 120-124, 130-131

units of observation, 104

usual intakes and, 7, 8, 9, 76-77, 81, 83-84, 85, 96, 97

within-person variation in intakes and, 9, 10, 94-95, 96

Group mean intakes

AIs and, 6, 12, 107, 108, 110, 111, 131

defined, 258

EARs and, 12, 103-104, 131

and group-level assessments, 12, 14-15, 103-104, 131, 134, 138-139

RDAs and, 12, 103, 128

H

Health claims, 41

Hospital patients, menu planning for, 41

Household inventories, 153

Household-level assessments

adequacy of nutrient intakes, 233-234

application, 234-235

defined, 257

dietary data used in, 104, 156-157, 235-236

food energy, 232-233

household requirement and, 232-233, 234

nutrients, 233-235

population of households, 233

I

Inadequacy of nutrient intake, 187, 205, 257

Indicators of nutrient adequacy, risk reduction-based, 2, 23, 27

Individual-level assessments

AI used in, 4, 6-7, 46, 51, 58-62, 67, 68, 69, 194, 198-200

applications of DRIs in, 4, 46, 66-69

in assisted living setting, 66-67, 68

biological parameters considered, 47, 66, 67, 69

choosing reference standard for, 50-51

confidence of adequacy, 6, 56-57, 60, 64-65, 67, 68, 189-190, 197, 199, 200

confidence of safety, 199, 201

day-to-day variability in intake and, 5, 6, 45, 48-49, 50, 51, 52, 54, 55-56, 60, 186, 187, 188, 191-196

dietary intake data for, 49-50, 54

distribution of daily intakes and, 61-62, 190, 198-199, 201

EAR used in, 4, 5-6, 46, 50-51, 52-58, 59, 67, 68, 69, 185, 186-197

implementation of approach, 193-195

lifestyle information, 69

limitations of methods, 45-46, 195-197

measurement of dietary intake and, 47, 48-50, 51, 54, 56, 58, 67, 187

observed intakes and, 5, 6, 49, 50, 51, 66, 185, 188

observed mean intakes and, 5-6, 37, 45, 48-50, 51, 52, 55, 58, 60-61, 62, 63, 67, 185, 186, 188

precision of, 46-47

in pregnancy planning context, 67-69

probability of inadequacy, 5

Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×

proposed new method , 46-66

qualitative interpretation of intakes, 62, 65, 68

RDAs and, 4, 6, 46, 51, 54, 56, 57, 68, 69

requirement differences and, 5, 6, 45, 46, 50-51, 57-58, 186, 188, 190

research recommendations, 165

statistical foundations, 185-202

supplement use and, 7, 62, 63, 65-66, 201-202

types of information required for, 47, 66, 67, 69, 186

ULs used in, 4, 7, 46, 51, 62-66, 67, 68, 69, 199, 201-202

uncertainty in, 45, 51, 188-189, 201

usual intakes and, 5, 7, 45, 46, 47, 48-50, 51, 52, 58, 59-60, 64, 185-186, 187

z-test, 6, 189, 198-200, 201

Infants, AI derivation for, 25, 107, 109, 110, 239-240

Institutional dietary assessment and planning

for hospital patients, 41

RDAs and RNIs used in, 36-37, 39, 40, 41

requirement variance greater than intake variance, 91-93, 228-229

Interindividual variability, defined, 257

Intraindividual variability.

See also Within-person variation in intakes

defined, 257

Iowa State University method, 98-102, 160

Iron, 22, 42, 46, 50-51, 57, 67, 80, 81, 89, 91, 149, 158, 191, 192, 197, 212, 230

J

Joint distribution of intake and requirement

collecting data on, 76

cut-point method, 83-84, 85, 86, 204, 208, 209, 213

defined, 257

estimation of, 203-204, 209

probability approach, 77

L

Life-stage groups.

See also Adolescents;

Adults;

Children;

Infants;

individual nutrients

AIs of nutrients by, 107-109, 240-253

categories, 183

and derivation of DRIs, 149, 181

EARs of nutrients by, 268-269

ULs of nutrients by, 115-119, 270-271

Lifestyle information, 69

Likelihood

of adequacy, 233

defined, 258

LOAEL, 114, 115-119, 121, 122, 258

Log normal distribution, 91, 229-231

Long-term care facilities, 91-93

M

Magnesium

distribution of usual intake, 121, 191, 192

EARs, 268

group-level assessments, 10-11, 82-83, 108, 129

individual-level assessments, 53-57, 191, 192

prevalence of inadequate intakes, 10-11, 142-143

prevalence of excess intakes, 14-15, 131, 142-143

RDAs, 274

risk of excessive intakes, 14-15, 63

supplement intake distribution, 124

ULs, 115, 130, 270

Malnutrition, 26

Mean intake.

See also Group mean intakes;

Observed mean intakes

regression-adjusted differences in, 135

Mean requirement, defined, 258

Measuring dietary intakes

bias in, 17, 164

bioavailability considerations, 157-158

chronic illness and, 156

eating practices and, 152, 156

encouraging accurate reporting, 153-154

energy intake and, 152, 153, 160

food composition data and, 17, 152, 154, 157, 160, 164-165

Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×

for group-level assessments, 97-98

for individual-level assessments, 47, 48-50, 51, 54, 56, 58, 67, 187

instruments for, 16, 17, 49, 150, 151-153, 164

life circumstance considerations, 156

memory probes and cues, 154

physiological considerations, 16

portion size considerations, 152, 154, 160

research recommendations, 17, 163-165

seasonality/periodicity considerations, 155-156

supplement use, 17, 150, 154-155, 164

systematic variations and, 155-156, 160

unit of measurement and, 158, 165

unit of observation and, 156-157

variance in, 160-161

Measurement error

defined, 257

in individual nutritional assessment, 57-58

influence on assessment results, 147

minimizing, 147, 150-158

model, 97-98

within-person variation in intake, 49-50, 58

Military food and nutrition planning and policy, 34-37, 39

Multiple regression analyses, 133, 134-140, 166

N

National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 58, 65, 99, 155, 164, 166, 195-196, 199

National Research Council method, 93-94, 97-98, 100

National School Lunch Program, 35

Neural tube defects, 26, 27, 69

Niacin

bioavailability, 158

EARs, 50, 149, 150, 197, 268

energy intake and, 149, 150

group-level assessments, 10-11, 82-83, 108, 129, 130, 131

individual-level assessments, 48, 191, 192

prevalence of excess intakes, 14-15, 142-143

prevalence of inadequate intakes, 14-15, 142-143

RDAs, 275

risk of excessive intakes, 14-15, 142-143

supplement intake distribution, 121, 124

ULs, 117, 122, 124, 271

units, 158

NOAEL, 114, 115-119, 121, 122, 258

Normal distribution, defined, 258

Normative storage requirement, 22

Nutrient assessment of groups.

See Group-level assessments

Nutrient assessment of individuals.

See Individual-level assessments

Nutrient content claims, 41

Nutrient density approach, 208, 234-235

Nutrient equivalents, 158

Nutrient intakes.

See Observed intakes;

Observed mean intakes;

Usual intakes of nutrients

Nutrient–nutrient interactions, 63

Nutrient requirement.

See also Distribution of requirements;

Standard deviation of requirements

average/mean, 74, 75, 77, 207

correlated with usual intakes, 8, 81, 87-89, 212-224

criterion of nutritional adequacy, 22

CV, 83, 187

defined, 22, 47, 258, 259

household-level, 232-233, 234

independence of usual intakes, 81, 83-84, 85, 86, 88

and intake variance, 5, 11, 47, 83, 86, 91-93, 161, 205, 212, 224-229

nutrient intake compared, 5, 47, 52

per capita, 237

uncertainty for individuals, 5, 6, 45, 46, 50-51, 57-58, 165-166, 186, 188, 189, 190

variance of, 11, 83, 86, 91-93, 161, 205, 212, 224-229, 234

Nutrition education, 32-33, 35-36, 37, 38, 39, 42

Nutritional Standards for Operational Rations, 37

Nutritional status, 258

Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×

O

Observed intakes, 56-57.

See also Distribution of observed intakes defined, 185

exceeding AIs, 59-60

heterogeneous within-person variation, 95

and individual-level assessments, 5, 6, 49, 50, 51, 66, 185, 188

settings appropriate for measuring, 66

short-term, 185

usual intakes from, 49, 50, 52, 185

Observed mean intakes

bias in, 58

computation of, 185

day-to-day variability and, 45

difference between EAR and, 188

and group-level assessments, 96, 97

and individual-level assessments, 5-6, 37, 45, 48-50, 51, 52, 55, 58, 60-61, 62, 63, 67, 185, 186, 188

qualitative interpretation relative to AIs, 62

skewed, 95-96

and ULs, 63-64

usual intake from, 186

Osteomalacia, 107

P

Pantothenic acid

AIs, 25, 110, 248-249, 275

group-level assessments, 10-11, 73, 82-83, 108

Performance assessment, cut-point method, 18, 87, 102, 167, 211-231

Phosphorus

AIs, 108, 274

distribution of usual intakes, 121

EARs, 99-102, 129, 130, 131, 268

energy and, 63-64

group-level assessments, 10-11, 82-83, 99-102, 129, 130, 131

individual-level assessments, 63-65, 68, 191, 192

prevalence of excessive intakes, 14-15, 142-143

prevalence of inadequate intakes, 14-15, 142-143

RDAs, 129, 274

risk of excessive intakes, 14-15, 121, 142-143

ULs, 63-65, 116, 130, 270

Physiological considerations, 149

Population-level assessments

defined, 258

demographically weighted averages, 233, 237, 238

dietary data used in, 104, 157, 236-237

food energy, 236, 237

nutrients, 237-238

population mean intake and, 125

prevalence of inadequate intakes, 81-82

Potassium, 191, 192

Power transformation, 97-98

Pregnancy, 27

folate and, 69

individual-level nutrient assessment for, 67-69

Prevalence, defined, 258

Prevalence of excess intakes, 42

usual intakes compared to UL, 14-15, 130, 131, 142-143

underestimation, 154-155

Prevalence of inadequate intakes

adjustment of intake distributions and, 94, 104

AIs and, 12, 109-110

bias in, 86, 88, 91, 99, 102, 155, 156, 160, 207, 214, 215, 216, 221-223, 224, 227

binary variables and, 140

bioavailability considerations, 157-158

by children, 130-131

comparison of two populations, 135-139

counting approach, 74, 75

by cut-point method, 18, 86, 104, 209-210, 213, 214-221, 225-226, 230

defined, 8, 206, 259

EAR and, 14-15, 86, 104, 130-131, 142-143, 209-210, 213, 214-221, 225-226, 230

in group-level assessments, 8, 12, 14-15, 73-74, 76-81, 86, 87-89, 94, 99, 101, 102, 109-110, 129-132, 135-139, 142-143, 203-210, 213, 214-221, 225-226

in individual-level assessment, 5

joint distribution of intake and requirement and, 203-204, 208

Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×

overestimation, 87-89, 93, 94, 102-104, 153-154

performance of methods to estimate, 18

population, 81-82, 86

probability approach to estimating, 74, 76-81, 205-208

RDAs/RNIs and, 32-33, 35, 104

standard deviation of estimates, 17-18, 158-161, 165-166

statistical approaches, 18, 76-93, 203

in subpopulations, 18, 166

uncertainty in, 158-161

underestimation, 89-93, 94, 102

usual intake distribution and, 14-15, 130-131, 135-139

zero, 90

Prison populations, 91-92

Probability approach (full)

correlation of intake and requirement and, 8, 88-89

cut-point method compared, 208, 209, 212, 213, 229, 231

density estimation, 208

EAR calculation, 8-9, 74, 76-81, 83-84, 88-89, 91, 205-208, 209, 212, 213, 229, 231

key assumptions, 80

normal model, 208

performance of model, 208, 212

principle, 8, 232

risk curve, 77-80, 91, 124, 205-206, 208

software, 207

t model, 208

uncertainty in, 158-159

Probability of inadequacy, 56-57, 153-154, 259

Program participation, and adequacy of nutrient intakes, 35, 39, 133-139

Protein, 91, 148, 193-194, 233

Provitamin A carotenoids, 158

Q

Qualitative assessment of nutrient intakes

AIs and, 62

individual-level, 62, 65, 68

ULs and, 65

R

Recommended daily intakes, 23

Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs)

adjustments to, 26, 148, 150

AIs compared, 26-27, 59, 109, 198

as benchmarks, 40

and clinical dietetics, 36-37, 41

context for use, 23, 111

defined, 2, 3, 11, 24, 29, 102, 131, 257, 259

demographically weighted, 237, 238

derivation of, 24

and dietary data evaluation, 32-33, 38

and disease risk assessment, 36-37, 40

DRIs contrasted, 2-3, 22-23

EAR and, 23, 24, 25, 54, 56, 103

extrapolation from other age groups, 26

and food and nutrition assistance programs, 34-35

and food guides, 32-33

and food labeling and nutritional marketing, 36-37, 41

and food safety, 36-37, 42

and fortification of foods, 36-37, 42

and group-level assessments, 4, 11, 24, 102-104, 127, 131

group-mean intakes compared, 12, 103, 128

inappropriate use of, 11, 102-104, 127, 128, 131, 237-238

and individual-level assessments, 4, 6, 46, 51, 54, 56, 57, 68, 69

and institutional dietary assessment and planning, 36-37, 40

and military food and nutrition planning and policy, 34-37, 39

nutrients by life-stage group, 274-276

and nutrition education, 32-33

for population-level assessments, 237-238

research needs, 16-17, 162-163

risk of inadequacy, 24

RNIs contrasted, 30

ULs and, 126

uncertainty in, 27, 126

uses, 24, 31-42

Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×

Reference Daily Intake, 41

Reference heights and weights, 89, 181-182, 183, 184

Research recommendations

group level assessment methods, 17-18, 165-167

improving requirement data, 16-17, 162-163

individual level assessment methods, 165

quality of dietary intake data, 17, 163-165

Riboflavin

AIs, 275

EARs, 268

energy intake and, 149

group-level assessments, 10-11, 82-83, 108, 129, 130, 131

individual-level assessments, 68, 191, 192

prevalence of inadequate intakes, 14-15, 142-143

RDAs, 275

Rickets, 107

Risk

defined, 259

of excess, 260

of exposure, 260

of inadequacy, 24, 59, 205-206, 260

weighted average of, 206

Risk assessment

defined, 259

disease, 36-37, 40

for ULs, 13, 24, 25, 62, 113-114, 120-125

Risk curve, 77-80, 91, 120, 124, 163, 260

and distribution of usual intakes, 78-80, 121, 205-206, 208

Risk-reduction based indicator of nutrient adequacy, 2, 23, 27

S

Sample size considerations, 98-99

Sampling weights, 96, 133

School Breakfast Program, 35

Selenium, 10-11, 14, 82-83, 108, 116, 129, 130, 131, 142, 269, 271, 276

Sensitivity analysis, defined, 260

Single-endpoint approach, 3-4, 22

Skewed distribution

adjusting, 46, 61-62, 95-96

defined, 260

of nutrient requirements, 46, 50-51, 57, 67, 80, 81, 89-91, 197, 207, 212, 229-231

of observed intakes, 56, 61-62, 95-96, 190, 196, 197, 201

of usual intakes, 95-96, 209

Sodium, 191, 192

Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children

See WIC program

Standard deviation

of difference between mean observed intake and EAR (SDD), 52-54, 68, 188, 192-193

EAR and, 24, 52-53, 54, 195-196

of intakes, 53-56, 58, 60-61, 64-65, 68, 187-188, 191-196, 199-201

mean intake and, 65

pooled from large surveys, 53, 54-55, 58, 64, 65, 195-196, 198-199, 200, 201-202

in prevalence estimates, 74, 158-161, 212

by vitamin or mineral, 191-192

within-person, 6, 51, 52-53, 54, 56, 68, 191-195

z-test, 6

Standard deviation of prevalence of nutrient inadequacy

collection of intake data and, 160-161

EAR-related, 159-160

for individuals, 46, 52-53, 54-56, 58, 60, 61, 195-196

sampling variability and, 159

Standard deviation of requirements, 1

CV estimates and, 57-58, 194, 197

and group-level assessments, 52, 58, 74, 93, 212, 225-227

incorrect specification of, 197

for individual-level assessments, 52, 53, 54, 68, 188, 194, 197

population, 186

RDA computation, 24

Standardized predicted intake, 136-137

Subpopulations

distribution of usual intakes in, 14-15, 132-139, 142-143

prevalence of inadequacy in, 18, 166

Summer Food Service Program, 35

Supplement use

and adjustment of DRIs, 149

averaging over time, 155

Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×

and distribution of usual intakes, 155, 164

and group-level assessments, 95

in hospitals, 41

and individual-level assessments, 7, 62, 63, 65-66, 201-202

in military operational conditions, 39

quantifying intakes from, 17, 150, 154-155, 164

and ULs, 7, 26, 62, 63, 65-66, 122-125, 155-156, 201-202

Surveys. See Dietary survey data;

individual surveys

Symmetrical distribution

defined, 260

of nutrient requirements, 74, 77, 81, 190, 205n.1, 207, 208

T

t model, 208

t tests, 133, 137

Thiamin

AIs, 274

EARs, 268

energy intake and, 149, 150

group-level assessments, 10-11, 82-83, 108, 129, 130, 131

individual-level assessments, 68, 191, 192

prevalence of inadequate intakes, 14-15, 142-143

RDAs, 274

Threshold, 260

Thrifty Food Plan, 35, 39

Tolerable Upper Intake Levels (ULs)

chronic intakes above, 63, 125, 126

context for use, 113, 120, 124

critical adverse affect, 115-119

defined, 3, 25, 62, 114, 125, 261

derivation of, 26

dose-response assessment, 13, 114, 121, 124

in food and nutrition assistance programs, 39

food fortification and, 26, 124, 125, 201

and food guides, 38

food safety considerations, 42

frequently asked questions, 125-126

in group-level assessments, 4, 13, 120-124, 130-131

in individual nutritional assessment, 4, 7, 46, 51, 62-66, 67, 68, 69, 199, 201-202

LOAEL/NOAEL, 114, 115-119, 121, 122, 258

nutrients, by life-stage group, 115-119, 270-271

population mean intake and, 125

qualitative interpretation of intakes relative to, 65

rationale for term, 25

RDAs and, 126

research recommendations, 163

risk assessment approach, 13, 24, 25, 62, 113-114, 120-125

supplement use and, 7, 26, 62, 63, 65-66, 122-125, 154-155, 201-202

theory and definitions, 113-120

type of intake and, 7, 62, 114, 120-121, 124, 202

uncertainty factor, 13, 27, 114-120, 122, 202, 261

uses, 23, 30, 42

usual intake distributions and, 13, 120-121, 130-131

vulnerable subpopulations, 114, 124

Toxicity, defined, 260

True prevalence, 261

U

Uncertainty

in adequacy of nutrient intake, 186, 188-189

in cut-point method, 158-159

in DRIs, 27

in EAR, 27, 159-160

in individual-level assessment, 45, 51, 188-189, 201

in nutrient requirements, 5, 6, 45, 46, 50-51, 57-58, 165-166, 186, 188, 189, 190

Uncertainty factor, 13, 27, 114-120, 122, 202, 261

United Nations University, 233, 234

Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×

Units of observation.

See also Group-level assessments;

Household-level assessments;

Individual-level assessments;

Population-level assessments

defined, 261

and measuring dietary intakes, 156-157

Univariate distribution

defined, 261

of usual intakes, 76-77, 209

Unmixing algorithm, 97

U.S. Department of Agriculture

dietary guidelines, 32-33, 38

food plans, 35, 39

food use data adjustments, 235

Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, 157

U.S. Department of Defense, 39

Usual intakes of nutrients, 1.

See also Adjusting intake distributions;

Distribution of usual intakes

and AI, 46, 59-60, 110, 126

average, 74, 75

confidence levels, 6, 56, 64-65

correlated with requirements, 8, 81, 87-89, 212-224

defined, 93, 185-186, 261

descriptive analyses of, 133-134

and EARs, 14-15, 130-131

estimation challenges, 49

group-level assessments, 76-77, 81, 83-84, 85, 96, 97, 130-131

independent of requirement, 81, 83-84, 85, 86, 88

individual-level assessment, 5, 7, 45, 46, 47, 48-50, 51, 52, 58, 59-60, 64, 185-186, 187

mean of, 74

number of days needed to estimate, 6, 48-49, 187

from observed intakes, 49, 50, 52, 185

from observed mean intakes, 97, 186

obtaining information on, 48-50, 58

random error in, 58, 164

and ULs, 7, 64

variance of, 11, 83, 161

V

Variance in dietary assessment.

See also Within-person variation in intakes collection of intake data and, 94, 160-161

in day-to-day intakes, 5, 53, 60, 94

in distribution of nutrient requirement, 8, 53n.1, 162-163, 188

in distribution of observed intakes, 94

in distribution of usual intakes, 93

EAR-related variability, 50, 159-160

measurement error, 98

representative subsamples of groups, 158

sampling variability, 159

standard deviation of prevalence estimates, 158-161

Vitamin A, 22, 46, 49, 56, 63, 67, 95, 191, 192, 197, 200

Vitamin B6, 10-11, 14, 82-83, 99-102, 108, 117, 122, 126, 129, 130, 131, 142, 191, 192, 269, 271, 275

Vitamin B12, 10-11, 14, 15, 22, 46, 63, 67, 82-83, 108, 129, 130, 131, 142, 143, 149, 191, 192, 200, 269, 275

Vitamin C, 10-11, 14, 46, 48, 56, 63, 67, 82-83, 108, 118, 121, 129, 130, 131, 142, 191, 192, 197, 269, 271, 276

Vitamin D, 10-11, 15, 51, 68, 73, 82-83, 107, 108, 110, 118, 131, 143, 149, 244-245, 270, 274

Vitamin E, 10-11, 14, 46, 56, 63, 67, 82-83, 108, 116, 121, 124, 129, 130, 131, 142, 164, 191, 192, 197, 269, 271, 276

W

Weight history, 67, 69

WIC program, 34-35, 39

Within-person variation in intakes

adjusting intake distributions for, 9, 94-95, 96, 196-197

asymmetrical, 56

of cholesterol, 193-194

Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×

computation of, 195-196

and group-level assessment, 94-95

heterogeneous, 95

and individual-level assessment, 5, 6, 45, 48-49, 50, 51, 52, 54, 55-56, 60, 186, 187, 188, 191-196

large, 94-95

by macronutrient, 193-194

pooled estimate of, 50, 54-55, 65, 195-196, 202

sociocultural factors, 156

standard deviation, 6, 51, 52-53, 54, 56, 68, 191-196, 202

by vitamin or mineral, 191-192

Z

z-test, 6, 189, 198-200, 201

Zinc, 158, 191, 192

Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×
Page 267
Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×
Page 268
Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×
Page 269
Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×
Page 270
Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×
Page 271
Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×
Page 272
Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×
Page 273
Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×
Page 274
Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×
Page 275
Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×
Page 276
Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×
Page 277
Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×
Page 278
Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×
Page 279
Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×
Page 280
Suggested Citation:"Index." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9956.
×
Page 281
Next: Summary Table: Estimated Average Requirements »
Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment Get This Book
×

Since 1994 the Institute of Medicine's Food and Nutrition Board has been involved in developing an expanded approach to developing dietary reference standards. This approach, the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs), provides a set of four nutrient-based reference values designed to replace the Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs) in the United States and the Recommended Nutrient Intakes (RNIs) in Canada. These reference values include Estimated Average Requirement (EAR), Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA), Adequate Intake (AI), and Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL). To date, several volumes in this series have been published.

This new book, Applications in Dietary Assessment, provides guidance to nutrition and health research professionals on the application of the new DRIs. It represents both a "how to" manual and a "why" manual. Specific examples of both appropriate and inappropriate uses of the DRIs in assessing nutrient adequacy of groups and of individuals are provided, along with detailed statistical approaches for the methods described. In addition, a clear distinction is made between assessing individuals and assessing groups as the approaches used are quite different. Applications in Dietary Assessment will be an essential companion to any-or all-of the DRI volumes.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!