Evaluation of Dietary Intake Analysis Using Egyptian Modified Food Processor Software and Traditional Method: A Comparative Study

Dalia I. Tayel1* , Nagwa M. Aboudeif1 , Noha S. Mohamed2 , Ezzat K. Amine1
Nutrition Department, 2Biostatistics Department, High Institute of Public Health, Alexandria University, Egypt
*Correspondence Email Address: dalia2tayel@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT
Background: Dietary intake assessment is fundamental to nutrition research and many commercial dietary analysis software packages exist on the market. Objective: The study aimed to modify the ESHA food processor dietary analysis software using Egyptian food composition database and to compare the dietary analysis results obtained from the modified software with that attained using the traditional dietary analysis method. Subjects and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 100 adults selected at random from the employees of Alexandria University. Data about dietary intake was collected using 24 hours recall method. Results: The mean daily dietary intake of all nutrients was significantly lower by the modified food processor than that by the traditional method except calcium. The modified food processor software underestimated energy and nutrient intakes, nutrients density and adequacy. The mean percent difference between the modified food processor and the traditional dietary analysis method showed no significant underestimation of nutrients intakes calculated by the modified food processor as it did not exceed 15% which is an acceptable level; except for protein and sodium adequacies. Conclusion: The modified ESHA food processor software is easier, faster, and more flexible in use with search options and reporting capabilities.

Keywords: Egyptian food composition database, ESHA food processor, Traditional dietary intake analysis
Citation: Tayel DI, Aboudeif NM, Mohamed NS, Amine EK. Evaluation of Dietary Intake Analysis Using Egyptian Modified Food Processor Software and Traditional Method: A Comparative Study. Canadian Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2020; 8 (1): 36-53.
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.14206/canad.j.clin.nutr.2020.01.04

Download