Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Apr 29.
Published in final edited form as: J Am Diet Assoc. 2009 May;109(5):899–904. doi: 10.1016/j.jada.2009.02.008

Table 1.

Diet Record (DR) and Arizona Food Frequency Questionnaire (AFFQ) nutrient intake estimates, Percent Differences, and Pearson’s Correlations in postmenopausal women (n=244).

Nutrient Diet Records
Mean±SDa
AFFQ
Mean±SD
%
Differenceb
Pearson’s
Correlationc
Alcohol (g) 5 ± 8 3± 5 40 0.71
Caffeine (mg) 189 ± 163 224 ± 210 −19 0.69
Fat (g) 58 ± 20 50 ± 23 14 0.63
Carbohydrate (g) 228 ± 53 238 ± 102 −4 0.62
Fiber (g) 20 ± 6 21 ± 11 −5 0.62
Potassium (mg) 2823 ± 695 3228 ± 1290 −14 0.60
Vitamin C (mg) 133 ± 65 156 ± 102 −17 0.60
Vitamin E (mg) 9 ± 4 8 ± 5 11 0.59
Magnesium (mg) 302 ± 74 324 ± 126 −7 0.59
Calcium (mg) 776 ± 261 942 ± 468 −21 0.56
Iron (mg) 15 ± 5 14 ± 6 7 0.55
Zinc (mg) 10 ± 3 10 ± 5 0 0.54
Phosphorus (mg) 1136 ± 277 1247 ± 533 −10 0.48
Vitamin D (mcg) 5 ± 3 3 ± 3 40 0.47
Protein (g) 70 ± 18 64 ± 26 9 0.41
Sodium (mg) 2698 ± 810 2693 ± 1076 0 0.33
Energy (kcal) 1707 ± 365 1631 ± 637 5 0.31d
Total Calciume (mg) 1483 ± 316 1598 ± 539 −8 0.31
a

SD = standard deviation

b

% difference estimated mean nutrient intakes from DR-AFFQ/DR. Percent differences are not statistically different between methods for any nutrient, p≤0.05.

c

Pearson’s correlations between DR and AFFQ estimated mean nutrient intakes are log transformed and energy-adjusted (standardized residual method) p ≤ 0.05.

d

Pearson’s correlation between DR and AFFQ for Energy. Energy is Log transformed p ≤ 0.05.

e

Dietary calcium plus calcium supplement (mg).