European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2006) 60, 408–415

& 2006 Nature Publishing Group All rights reserved 0954-3007/06 $30.00
www.nature.com/ejcn

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Validity of a questionnaire to assess fruit and
vegetable intake in adults
AG Kristjansdottir1, LF Andersen2, J Haraldsdottir3, MDV de Almeida4 and I Thorsdottir1

1
Unit for Nutrition Research, Landspitali-University Hospital & Department of Food Science, University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland;
2
Department of Nutrition, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; 3Department of Human Nutrition, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural
University, Copenhagen, Denmark and 4Faculty of Nutrition and Food Sciences, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal

Objective: To validate a method for assessing fruit and vegetable intake among adults in a population of low intake. The method
assesses mean intake and ranks individuals by their usual intake.
Design: A precoded fruit and vegetable Questionnaire included a 24-h recall and a food frequency. The participants filled in the
Questionnaire, a week later they started a 7-day food record, 1-day weighed record and 6 days using household measures.
Subjects: Following advertisements 40 participants were recruited, 36 returned food records(mean age ¼ 37 years).
Results: No difference was observed between the average intake yielded by the 24-h recall and that from the 1-day weighed
food record of fruits or vegetables. Correlation coefficients between results from the food frequency questionnaire and the 7-day
food records were 0.45 (P ¼ 0.007) for vegetables, 0.63 (Po0.001) for fruits and 0.73 (Po0.001) for fruits and vegetables
combined. Cross-classification into quartiles showed that the proportion of participants in the same or the adjacent quartile of
the intake distribution were 94% for fruit intake and 80% for vegetable intake. Registered intake of fruits and vegetables was
higher the first 4 days of the record than the last 3 days (P ¼ 0.002). The 4-day food record correlated with the food frequency
questionnaire in similar manner as the 7-day record.
Conclusion: The present study indicates that the precoded 24-h recall may be valuable tool for measuring average intake of
fruits and vegetables among adults in a population of low intake. Moreover, the food frequency questionnaire was valid for
ranking individuals according to their usual intake. A 4-day food record might be sufficient when validating food frequency
questionnaires for fruits and vegetables.
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2006) 60, 408–415. doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602332; published online 23 November 2005

Keywords: fruit; Iceland; validity; vegetable; questionnaire

Introduction Powles, 1997; Joshipura et al., 1999, 2001; Willett, 2000;

A diet high in its variety of fruits and vegetables is associated
with decreased risk of cardiovascular diseases and several
types of cancer (Steinmetz and Potter, 1996; Ness and
Correspondence: Professor I Thorsdottir, Unit for Nutrition Research,
Landspitali-University Hospital & Department of Food Science, University of
Iceland, IS-101 Reykjavik, Iceland.
E-mail: ingathor@landspitali.is
Guarantor: I Thorsdottir.
Contributors: AGK worked on the statistical analysis and wrote the first draft of
the manuscript and made the greatest contribution to this paper. LFA, JH and
MDVdA participated in designing the study and project planning. LFA and JH
also participated in the data analysis. IT was the local project leader and
participated in all parts of the work. All investigators contributed to the writing
of the final paper.
Received 26 April 2005; revised 16 August 2005; accepted 14 September
2005; published online 23 November 2005
Key et al., 2002; Hu, 2003). The health benefits of fruits and
vegetables seen in epidemiology studies are the main reasons
for the recommended intake of at least 400 g of fruit and
vegetable per day, potatoes not included (WHO, 2003). Large
population groups, particularly in Northern Europe, how-
ever, eat far less than the recommended amount of
vegetables and fruits.
The consumption is especially low in Iceland (The
Norbagreen 2002 study, 2003; Steingrimsdottir et al., 2003;
FAO statistic database, 2004). Although the consumption of
vegetables, fruits and fruit juice has increased slightly
between 1990 and 2002, which was significant for vegetables
(Steingrimsdottir et al., 1991, 2003), it is far from the
recommended intake and the Icelandic nutritional goal for
fruits and vegetables of 500 g per day of vegetables, fruit
and fruit juice. The mean consumption according to the

last national survey 2002 was 230 g of vegetables, fruits
and fruit juice per day (Steingrimsdottir et al., 2003). A valid
method is needed to evaluate the consumption, and
especially changes in consumption level, where it is
especially low.
This paper describes a validation of an instrument
aimed to be used in the Pro Children Project, where Iceland
was one of nine participating European countries. The Pro
Children Project was designed to provide information on
actual consumption levels of vegetables and fruits in
European school children and their parents, and to under-
stand the determinants of consumption patterns among
the children (Klepp et al., 2005). Moreover, the Pro Children
Project aims to develop and test strategies, applicable
across Europe, for promoting consumption of vegetables
and fresh fruits among school children and their
parents. Adults’ intake, that is, parents’ intake, has been
found to be one of the key correlates of children’s fruit
and vegetable intake (De Bourdeaudhuij et al., 2005).
An instrument to assess fruit and vegetable intake
across Europe needed to be developed. Such an instrument
should be brief, self-administrable, and give comparable
results from countries at different consumption level.
Moreover, the instrument should give valid information
on the ranking of individuals according to their usual
intake and on the mean intake of the group. Such an
instrument is currently not available, that is, able to
assess both group mean as well as ranking individuals
from different countries, especially no instrument has
been developed for low consumption population (Kim
and Holowaty, 2003). The instrument developed in the
study now presented included a food frequency part
and a precoded 24-h recall. The food frequency part was
used for ranking subjects according to their usual intake
and the 24-h part was used for measuring group mean
intake.
Multiple-day food records have commonly been used
for validation of food frequency questionnaires. The
records should be kept for a sufficient number of days to
represent the average intake (Cade et al., 2002). Cost and
respondent burden has to be taken into consideration and
Stram et al. (1995) have found that in most settings the
optimal study design will rarely require more than 4- or 5-
day diet records per subject. In the present study, the
method’s estimated mean intake was validated with 1-day
weighed record and the method’s estimation of usual intake
was validated with 7-day food record. A shorter food
recording period, that is 4 days, for validation of a food
frequency questionnaire for fruit and vegetable intake was
also evaluated.
The objective of the present study was to study the
validity of a Questionnaire for assessing fruit and
vegetable intake among adults in a population of low
intake. The method was aimed at assessing mean intake of
a group and to rank individuals according to their usual
intake.
Assessment of fruit and vegetable intake in adults
AG Kristjansdottir et al
409
Subjects and method
Subjects and design
Adults were recruited through advertisements at three small
work places and one small sport club in Reykjavik. A total of
40 adults agreed to participate, 13 men and 27 women. A
total of 36 returned the records, 11 men and 25 women
(participation rate 90%, mean age 37 years, range 30–50
years). Participants received oral and written information
about the study. All participants’ data were treated anon-
ymously. The Icelandic Data Protection Authority approved
the study protocol.
The Questionnaire was validated against food records. The
Questionnaire was answered a week before recording of the
diet. The 24-h recall part of the Questionnaire was validated
against a 1-day weighed record, and the food frequency part
was validated against a 7-day food record, the first day with
weighed food and the following 6 days with household
measures.
Prior to the validation a pretest had been sent home to
parents of 11-year-old school children in Reykjavik (n ¼ 91)
to test clarity and ease of completion. A total of 70 filled out
Questionnaires were returned (participation rate 77%). None
of these participants were included in the validation study.
Structure of the questionnaire
A Questionnaire was developed from validated tools used to
measure the effects of fruit and vegetable subscription in
schools in Denmark and Norway (Eriksen et al., 2003;
Andersen et al., 2004). The optically scannable Question-
naire was composed of a 24-h recall part and a food
frequency part. The 24-h recall part of the Questionnaire
was included to give information about intake of the group
and the amount and types of fruits and vegetables, whereas
the food frequency part made it possible to rank individuals
according to levels of usual intake.
Only fresh fruits were defined as fruits and 100% pure juice
as juice. From a nutritional point of view, fresh fruit are often
low energy-dense foods relatively rich in vitamins, minerals
and other bioactive compounds as well as being good source
of fibers (World Cancer Research Fund, 1997). When canned,
etc. sugar are usually added, and when fruit is dried it is not
low energy-dense food anymore. This is the reason for fresh
fruit being the main object of most countries recommenda-
tions about fruits and vegetables and the main object of the
planned intervention for school children in the Pro Children
project. Additionally, the usage of fruits in other than fresh
format is negligible in Iceland, especially among the young
population where it is hardly found (Steingrimsdottir et al.,
2003). Potatoes were not included in the calculations of
vegetable consumption. There was a question about the
intake of potatoes in the food frequency part to prevent
participants from marking potatoes as a cooked vegetable.
In the 24-h recall part, the day was divided into three
periods, that is, morning/midmorning, lunch/afternoon and
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition
 Assessment of fruit and vegetable intake in adults
AG Kristjansdottir et al
410
dinner/later in the evening. In each of the three periods of of vegetables in composite dishes is too hard to evaluate to
the day, participants were asked, using an open question, be included in a simple questionnaire. To keep it as simple as
what they had eaten during that period the day before. This possible, the 24-h recall part did not include specific
was done to prompt the participant’s memory to that specific questions on vegetables as part of composite dishes, except
period of the day. Then there were specific precoded for vegetable soup.
questions on juice, fruits and vegetables. The question on The food frequency part of the Questionnaire included six
juice was: what kind of juice did you drink and how many questions about the usual consumption of fruit, salad, raw
glasses. The question on fruits was: what kind of fruit did you vegetables, (potatoes), cooked vegetables and orange juice.
eat and how many pieces. Figure 1 shows an example of the The precoded response categories ranged from ‘never’ to
question on fruits in the 24-h recall. Vegetables were further ‘daily, more than twice a day’. Figure 2 shows an example of a
categorized into raw vegetables, salad and cooked vegetables. question on fruits in the food frequency part. Standards used
The question on raw vegetables was: what kind of raw for estimating the amounts in grams per day are shown in
vegetables did you eat and how many pieces or slices. The Table 2, supported by recent paper from WHO (Agudo, 2005).
questions on salad and cooked vegetables were similarly:
what kind and how many portions. Amounts were indicated
in terms of the number of pieces, slices or portions eaten
Food records
(Table 1). The portion sizes are supported by a recent paper
Participants were asked to record food intake for 7 days, one
from WHO (Agudo, 2005). The questions on salad and
day of weighed record and the following 6 days with
cooked vegetables were not included in the first period of the
household measures to reduce the burden on respondents.
day as they are usually not consumed in this period of the
day in the countries involved in the survey. Vegetable in Table 1 Definition of portion sizes for the 24-h recall part of the
composite dishes is thought to be of small importance in the Questionnaire used in the cross-sectional study
total European diet, except the vegetable soup in Southern
Food item Portion size (g/portion)
Europe. This may differ between individuals, but the amount
Fruit
Apple, banana, orange, pear (pieces) 100
H3. Did you eat fruit yesterday Tangerine (piece) 50
morning /midmorning? Melon (slice) 50
Yes Fruit salad (portion) 100
Other fruits (pieces/portion) 100
No
Fruit juice 200
If yes, What kind of fruit? How much?
Write 1 if you ate one apple, ½ if you ate a half Raw vegetables
Tomato (piece) 50
Cucumber (slice) 10
Apple piece Carrot (piece) 65
Other raw vegetables (portion) 50
Salad 40
Banana piece Cooked vegetables 60
Vegetable soup 80a
Orange piece
a
80 g per 250 g soup.

Tangerine piece
F1. How often do you usually eat fresh
Pear piece fruit?

Never
Melon slice
Less than one day per week
Fruit salad portion One day per week
2-4 days a week
Other fruit 5-6 days a week
(write which)
Every day, once a day
piece
_______________ or Every day, twice a day
_ portion Every day, more than twice a day
Figure 1 An example of a specific precoded question on fruits in Figure 2 An example of a specific precoded question on fruits in
the 24-h recall part. the food frequency part.

European Journal of Clinical Nutrition

 Assessment of fruit and vegetable intake in adults
AG Kristjansdottir et al
411
Table 2 Definition of portion sizes for the food frequency part of the Table 3 Intake of fruits, vegetables and juice in g/day, based on the 24-
Questionnaire used in the cross-sectional study (one portion at a time) h recall part of the Questionnaire and the weighed food record (WFR),
the first day of the 4-day food record (n ¼ 31a), mean (s.e.)
Food item Portion size (g/portion)
24-h recall WFR Difference Pb
Fruit 100
Orange juice 200 Fruits 125 (19) 157 (24) 32 0.305
Raw vegetables 50 Vegetables 99 (16) 105 (18) 6 0.789
Salad 40 Juiceb 87 (23) 90 (32) 3 0.672
Potato 70 Fruits and vegetables 224 (21) 262 (31) 38 0.315
Cooked vegetables 60 FVJc 311 (32) 352 (39) 41 0.419
a
31 weighed the first day.
b
Student’s t-test, except for juice, where Mann–Whitney test was used
For the 1-day weighed food record, the participants were (nonparametric test).
c
provided with a scale (PHILIPS HR 2385, Austria), and given Intake of fruits, vegetables and fruit juice.
written and oral instructions on how to use it, and how to
record the diet. The first recording day was defined for each
individual by the researchers in order to achieve an even Table 4 shows the mean consumption of fruits, vegetables
distribution of weighed food records between Sunday, Mon- and juice in g/day, estimated from the food frequency part of
days, Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays (the weekdays the Questionnaire and the 7-day food record as well as the 4-
covered by the 24-h recalls). Three participants did not day food record. There was no significant difference between
complete the 7-day record, one returned a 5-day record, and mean intake according to the food frequency part and the
two returned 6-day records. For these three participants, a food record (7- and 4-day) for both fruit and vegetable
daily mean consumption was calculated only from the intake; however, juice intake estimated from the food
recorded days. frequency part was significantly higher than from the food
record (7- and 4-day). All 100% pure juice consumed by the
participants during the recording period was 100% pure
Statistic
orange juice. There was no significant difference between
The data were analysed using the computer program SPSS
mean intake in 7- and 4-day records for fruits, vegetables and
version 11 (SPSS Inc., 1999). For data analyses, the data from
juice separately, but when these food items were combined
the questionnaire and the estimated food records were
the 4-day record gave higher intake values.
recoded into portions. The normality was tested with
Correlation coefficients between results from the food
Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. The distribution of the data was
frequency part of the Questionnaire and the 7-day food
normal; hence, parametric statistical methods were chosen,
record were 0.45 for vegetables, 0.63 for fruits and 0.75 for
except for juice, where non-parametric tests were used. The
fruit, vegetables and juice combined. Similar coefficients
sample mean and standard error of the mean are presented.
were found between the food frequency questionnaire and
The differences between the methods were tested using the
the 4-day food record (Table 5). Correlation between 7- and
Student’s t-test, Mann–Whitney test or Wilcoxon’s signed
4-day records was high.
ranks test. The suitability of the food frequency for ranking
Cross-classification of participants by quartiles of calcu-
participants was assessed by Pearson or Spearman correlation
lated intake from the 7-day food record and the food
analysis and by classifying participants into quartiles.
frequency part of the Questionnaire showed that, overall,
94% of the adults were placed in the correct part of the
Results consumption distribution for fruits (same plus adjacent
quartile); for total vegetables this figure was 80% (Table 6).
Table 3 shows mean fruit, vegetable and juice consumption The food frequency part of the Questionnaire grossly
(in g/day), estimated from the 24-h recall part of the misclassified 6% according to fruit intake and 20% according
Questionnaire and from the 1-day weighed food record. to vegetable intake. Similar results were found between the
The mean intake estimated with the two methods did not 4-day food record and the food frequency questionnaire.
differ significantly. Compared with 7-day record, 4-day record had 97% or more
The recorded intake of fruits, vegetables and juice of the participants correctly classified or in the adjacent
diminished gradually from the first to the last day of the quartile.
recording period. There was a significant difference of fruits
and vegetables combined, between the first 4 days, and from
the fifth to the last day of the recording period (P ¼ 0.008), as Discussion
well as for fruit, vegetables and juice combined (P ¼ 0.002).
Results from both the whole record period (approx 7-day The present study was conducted to validate a precoded
food record) and from the first 4 days of the recording period Questionnaire in a population with a low intake of fruits and
are presented. vegetables.

European Journal of Clinical Nutrition

 Assessment of fruit and vegetable intake in adults
AG Kristjansdottir et al
412
Table 4 Intake of fruits and vegetables in g/day, based on the food frequency part of the Questionnaire (FFQ) and the 7- and 4-day food record (FR),
(n ¼ 36a) mean (s.e.). The differences between the three methods are shown

FFQ FR (7d) Difference between Pb FR (4d) Difference between Pb Difference between Pb

FR (7d) and FFQ FR (4d) and FFQ FR (7d) and FR (4d)

Fruits 103 (15) 109 (15) 6 0.601 117 (15) 14 0.235 8 0.322
Vegetables 82 (9) 83 (9) 1 0.870 92 (11) 10 0.382 9 0.084
Juice 105 (21) 64 (16) 41* 0.003 74 (18) 31* 0.009 10 0.061
Fruits and vegetables 187 (19) 186 (20) 1 0.919 206 (21) 19 0.266 20* 0.010
FVJc 295 (31) 252 (25) 43* 0.024 282 (28) 13 0.494 30* 0.001
a
n ¼ 36, except for vegetables as one participant did not fill in the food frequency part for vegetables.
b
Student’s t-test, except for juice, where Wilcoxon’s signed ranked test was used (nonparametric test).
c
Intake of fruits, vegetables and fruit juice.
*
Significant difference.

Table 5 Correlation coefficients (Pearson or Spearman) between calculated intake from the food frequency part of the Questionnaire and the 7- and 4-
day food record, and between 7- and 4-day records (n ¼ 36a)

Correlation between Pb Correlation between Pb Correlation between Pb

FR (7d) and FFQ FR (4d) and FFQ FR (7d) and FR (4d)

Fruits 0.63 o0.001 0.70 o0.001 0.89 o0.001

Vegetables 0.45 0.007 0.40 0.017 0.92 o0.001
Juice 0.71 o0.001 0.71 o0.001 0.99 o0.001
Fruits and vegetables 0.73 o0.001 0.67 0.001 0.91 o0.001
FVJc 0.75 o0.001 0.79 o0.001 0.93 o0.001
a
n ¼ 36, except for vegetables as one participant did not fill in the food frequency part for vegetables.
b
Parametric test (Pearson correlation) except for juice where nonparametric test was used (Spearman correlation).
c
Intake of fruits, vegetables and fruit juice.

The 24-h recall part of the Questionnaire gave valid intake
data on the group mean intake level, compared with the
weighed food record. There was no significant difference
between intake estimated from the 24-h recall part of the
Questionnaire compared with the 1-day weighed food
record, that is, the first day of the record period. The mean
fruit and vegetable intake according to the 24-h recall part of
the Questionnaire was also similar to the 7- and 4-day food
record and to the food frequency part of the Questionnaire.
There are only a few validation studies on the 24-h recall
method, focusing on fruit and vegetable intake. A 24-h recall
instrument asking about fruit and vegetable intake similar
to the one validated in the present study was validated
against precoded food diaries, among 12-year old Norwegian
children (Andersen et al., 2004). The 24-h recall over-
estimated the intake of fruit and fruit juice compared to
the reference method, while there was no significant
difference observed for vegetable intake. In an American
study among adults, a telephone-administered focused-recall
for fruit and vegetable intake was validated against a
traditional 24-h recall (Neuhouser et al., 2001). The focused-
recall showed lower vegetable intake by 4.5% and higher
fruit intake by 12.5%.
The food frequency part of the Questionnaire was found
valid and suitable for ranking individuals according to fruit
and vegetable intake, when compared to dietary records.
Diet records have been widely used and accepted as a
preferred reference instrument in this type of study,
performed to validate simpler methods like 24-h recall and
short food frequency questionnaires, as recording involves
errors that are largely independent compared to the other
methods. A diet record does not rely on memory as do 24-h
recall and food frequency questionnaires, nor does it rely on
individuals’ perception of portion sizes, when it is a weighed
record (Willett, 1990; Cade et al., 2002). Recording, however,
requires the participants’ patience, time and work. Prolonged
recording has been shown to lead to diminished recorded
intake, and the amount of fruit and vegetables recorded is
less after 4 days of recording (Andersen et al., 2002). In the
present study, a significantly lower registered intake was
observed on the last 3 days, compared with the first 4 days of
the recording period. In the very beginning of the recording
period, participants possibly eat more fruits and vegetables,
than they customarily do, as these food items are presumed
healthy. However, the reason given by the participants for
insufficient registration in the end of the recording period
was that they found the keeping of records for more than 4
days too demanding. Fruits and vegetables are consumed
almost every day, and 4-day food record might be sufficiently
long time period to represent the usual intake.
The correlation coefficients between intake according to
the food frequency part of the Questionnaire and the 7-day
food record or 4-day food record are comparable to other
validation studies on fruit and vegetable consumption

European Journal of Clinical Nutrition

 Assessment of fruit and vegetable intake in adults
AG Kristjansdottir et al
413
Table 6 Cross-classification of participants by quartiles of calculated intake from the 7-day food record and the food frequency part of the Questionnaire, from the 4-day food record and the

misclassified (%) classified (%) adjacent quartiles (%) misclassified (%) classified (%) adjacent quartiles (%) misclassified (%)
among adults (Ling et al., 1998; Andersen et al., 2002; Van
Assema et al., 2002). The correlation coefficients between the

Grossly

0
3
3
0
food frequency part of the Questionnaire and the 7-day, as
well as 4-day, food record were all within an acceptable
range, being lowest for vegetables separately, r ¼ 0.45 and
0.40, respectively. The food frequency part seems therefore
FR (7d)-FR (4d)

less suitable for measuring vegetables alone than fruit or

Correct plus

100 total fruit and vegetable intake, which is similar to earlier

100
97
97
results (Andersen et al., 2002).
Cross-classification is well suited for seeing whether two
methods rank results in a similar or dissimilar manner. The
distribution of fruit and vegetable intake was acceptable to
be divided into equal quartiles. It was not possible to rank
Correctly

the subject into quartiles according to their juice intake as

75
64
64
78

the distribution was skewed. The number of participants

classified in the same quartile according to the food
frequency part of the Questionnaire and the 7-day food
record was highest for fruits, 94% in same or adjacent
Grossly

quartile, and a bit lower for vegetables, 80%. The 4-day

8

3
14
14

record gave similar results. These values are comparable with

those from other studies (Ling et al., 1998). As the 4-day
record ranked individuals similar to the 7-day record, a 4-day
food record might be sufficient when validating food
FFQ-FR (4d)

frequency questionnaires for fruits and vegetables.

Correct plus

In the present study overestimation of fruits and vegeta-

92
86
86
97

bles by the food frequency questionnaire did not seem to

be a problem. The list of food items in the present study
was kept short. Detailed food frequency questionnaires with
food frequency part of the Questionnaire and from the 7- and the 4-day food records (n ¼ 36a)

n ¼ 36, except for vegetables as one participant did not fill in the food frequency part for vegetables.

many food items yield a higher frequency of food consump-

tion than shorter lists; therefore, generalized categories may
Correctly

increase the validity of the questionnaire (Ling et al., 1998;

53
34
37
46

Amanatidis et al., 2001; Andersen et al., 2002). Investigators

have stated that overestimation may especially be magnified
for fruits and vegetables, which are perceived as healthy and
socially acceptable food (Amanatidis et al., 2001).
Grossly

3
20
17

The age of the participants in the present validation study

was chosen to be similar to the age of parents to 11-year-old
children, this was done since the instrument is meant to
be used across Europe for parents to 11-year-old school
Correct plus adjacent

children. A limitation of this study might be the relatively

FFQ-FR (7d)

quartiles (%)

small sample size and the recruitment of participants

94
80
83
97

through advertisement, which yields self-selected partici-

pants. People who are willing to participate in a study on diet
in relation to health may be more sensitive to dietary
Intake of fruits, vegetables and fruit juice.

guidelines (Riboli et al., 1997). This might explain a some-

classified (%)

what higher intake of fruit and vegetables in the present

Correctly

study than observed in the last national survey, that is, 230 g/
53
37
51
49

day (Steingrimsdottir et al., 2003) versus 311 g/day according

to the 24-h recall in the present study. The method used in
the national survey was one telephone administered 24-h
Fruits and vegetables

recall on the total diet, not especially designed for fruits

and vegetables. The validity of the instrument tested in the
present study is considered generalizable. The sample size
Vegetables

is most likely sufficient even though the likelihood of

Fruits

nonsignificant difference is possible. Significance of results

FVJb

was tested with nonparametric tests additionally to the

b
a

European Journal of Clinical Nutrition

 Assessment of fruit and vegetable intake in adults
AG Kristjansdottir et al
414
parametric, as the normal distribution had been verified by
Kolmogorov–Smirnov, which might be regarded as nonsen-
sitive for small samples. Nonparametric and parametric
methods showed the same results.
A diet much higher in fruits and vegetables than is
observed in the Icelandic diet is recommended. The
recommendation, that is, 500 g of vegetables, fruits and fruit
juice is far from the average intake in Iceland. Median intake
is even lower. It is therefore important to increase the intake
of fruits and vegetables in the population.
The precoded 24-h recall part of the Questionnaire proved
to be valid for assessing the mean group intake of fruits and
vegetables among adults in a population of low intake, and
the food frequency part of the Questionnaire was valid for
ranking individuals according to their usual fruit and
vegetable intake. The parts then complement each other,
and the instrument is therefore valid for assessing fruit and
vegetable intake among adults with low intake.
Acknowledgements
This study has been carried out with financial support from
the Commission of the European Communities, specific RTD
programme ‘Quality of Life and Management of Living
Resources’, QLK1-2001-00547 ‘Promoting and Sustaining
Health through Increased Vegetable and Fruit Consumption
among European Schoolchildren’ (Pro Children). It does not
necessarily reflect its views and in no way anticipates the
Commission’s future policy in this area.
The Pro Children consortium consists of the following
partners: Knut-Inge Klepp (Coordinator), Department of
Nutrition, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Carmen Perez
Rodrigo, Unidad de Nutricion Comunitaria, Bilbao, Spain;
Inga Thorsdottir, Unit for Nutrition Research, Landspitali
University Hospital, Reykjavik, Iceland; Pernille Due, De-
partment of Social Medicine, University of Copenhagen,
Denmark; Maria Daniel Vaz de Almeida, Faculdade de
Ciências da Nutrição e Alimentação da Universidade do Porto,
Portugal; Ibrahim Elmadfa, Institute of Nutrition, University
of Vienna, Austria; Jóhanna Haraldsdóttir, Research Depart-
ment of Human Nutrition, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural
University, Copenhagen, Denmark; Johannes Brug, Erasmus
Medical Center Rotterdam, Department of Public Health,
the Netherlands; Michael Sjöström, Unit for Preventive
Nutrition, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; Ilse
De Bourdeaudhuij, Department of Movement and Sport
Sciences, Ghent University, Belgium.
References
Agudo A (2005). Measuring intake of fruit and vegetables. Back-
ground Paper for the Joint FAO/WHO Workshop on Fruit and
Vegetables for Health, 2004, Kobe, Japan. WHO, Electronic
Resource.
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Amanatidis S, Mackerras D, Simpson JM (2001). Comparison of two
frequency questionnaires for quantifying fruit and vegetable
intake. Public Health Nutr 4, 233–239.
Andersen LF, Bere E, Kolbjornsen N, Klepp KI (2004). Validity and
reproducibility of self-reported intake of fruit and vegetable
among 6th graders. Eur J Clin Nutr 58, 771–777.
Andersen LF, Johansson L, Solvoll K (2002). Usefulness of a short
food frequency questionnaire for screening of low intake of
fruit and vegetable and for intake of fat. Eur J Public Health 12,
208–213.
Cade J, Thompson R, Burley V, Warm D (2002). Development,
validation and utilisation of food-frequency questionnaire – a
review. Public Health Nutr 5, 567–587.
De Bourdeaudhuij I, Klepp K-I, Due P, Perez Rodrigo C, de Almeida
MDV, Wind M et al. (2005). Reliability and validity of a
questionnaire to measure personal, social and environmental
correlates of fruit and vegetable intake in 10–11 year old children
in 5 European countries. Public Health Nutr 18, 189–200.
Eriksen K, Haraldsdottir J, Pederson R, Flyger HV (2003). Effect of a
fruit and vegetable subscription in Danish schools. Public Health
Nutr 6, 57–63.
FAO statistic database (2004): http://apps.fao.org/default.htm, vis-
ited at the 27.10.2004.
Hu FB (2003). Plant-based foods and prevention of cardiovascular
disease: an overview. Am J Clin Nutr 78 (Suppl 3), S544–S551.
Joshipura KJ, Ascherio A, Manson JE, Stampfer MJ, Rimm EB, Speizer
FE et al. (1999). Fruit and vegetable intake in relation to risk of
ischemic stroke. JAMA 282, 1233–1239.
Joshipura KJ, Hu FB, Manson JE, Stampfer MJ, Rimm EB, Speizer FE
et al. (2001). The effect of fruit and vegetable intake on risk for
coronary heart disease. Ann Intern Med 134, 1106–1114.
Key TJ, Allen NE, Spencer EA, Travis RC (2002). The effect of diet on
risk of cancer. Lancet 360, 861–868.
Kim DJ, Holowaty EJ (2003). Brief, validated survey instruments for
the measurement of fruit and vegetable intakes in adults: a review.
Prev Med 36, 440–447.
Klepp KI, Perez-Rodrigo C, Thorsdottir I, Due P, de Almeida MDV,
Elmadfa I et al. (2005). Promoting and sustaining health through
increased vegetable and fruit consumption among European
schoolchildren: The Pro Children Project. Ann Nutr Metab 49,
212–220.
Ling AM, Horwath C, Parnell W (1998). Validation of a short food
frequency questionnaire to assess consumption of cereal foods,
fruit and vegetables in Chinese Singaporeans. Eur J Clin Nutr 52,
557–564.
Ness AR, Powles JW (1997). Fruit and vegetables, and cardiovascular
disease: a review. Int J Epidemiol 26, 1–13.
Neuhouser ML, Patterson RE, Kristal AR, Eldridge AL, Vizenor NC
(2001). A brief dietary assessment instrument for assessing target
foods, nutrients and eating patterns. Public Health Nutr 4, 73–78.
Riboli E, Toniolo P, Kaaks R, Shore RE, Casagrande C, Pasternack BS
(1997). Reproducibility of a food frequency questionnaire used in
the New York University Women’s Health Study: effect of self-
selection by study subjects. Eur J Clin Nutr 51, 437–442.
Steingrimsdottir L, Thorsgeirsdottir H, Aegisdottir S (1991). The Diet
of Icelanders 1990. I. Main findings. Icelandic Nutrition Council,
Reykjavik.
Steingrimsdottir L, Thorsgeirsdottir H, Olafsdottir AS (2003). The Diet
of Icelanders Dietary Survey of The Icelandic Nutrition Council
2002, Main findings Research of Icelandic Nutrition Council V,
Reykjavik.
Steinmetz KA, Potter JD (1996). Vegetables, fruit, and cancer
prevention: a review. J Am Diet Assoc 96, 1027–1039.
Stram DO, Longnecker MP, Shames L, Kolonel LN, Wilkens LR, Pike
MC et al. (1995). Cost-efficient design of a diet validation study.
Am J Epidemiol 142, 353–362.
The Norbagreen 2002 study (2003). Consumption of vegetables,
potatoes, fruit, bread and fish in the Nordic and Baltic countries.
TemaNord 2003: 556, Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen.

Van Assema P, Brug J, Ronda G, Steenhuis I, Oenema A (2002). A short
dutch questionnaire to measure fruit and vegetable intake: relative
validity among adults and adolescents. Nutr Health 16, 85–106.
Willett WC (1990). Nutritional Epidemiology. Oxford University Press:
New York.
Willett WC (2000). Diet and cancer. Oncologist 5, 393–404.
Assessment of fruit and vegetable intake in adults
AG Kristjansdottir et al
415
World Cancer Research Fund/ American Institute for Cancer
Research (1997). Food nutrition and prevention of cancer: a global
perspective. WCFR/AICR: Washington, DC.
World Health Organisation (2003). Diet, nutrition and the prevention of
chronic diseases Report of a joint WHO/FAO expert consultation
WHO, Geneva.
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition