Exclusions

161 students entered data into the online database

36 males supplied data but were excluded from analysis
30 students provided incomplete data and were excluded from analysis

General info
95 females provided valid data and were included in the final analysis
Average age was 23.2 SD 5.2
Age range was between 20-50
For comparison between data and norms and recommendations can use '18 or above' or '18-30' years catergor

Statistical methods used

Statistical analyses were performed using STATA SE 17 software (StatCorp LP, USA).
Statistical significance was indicated by p < 0.05.
Correlation was performed using Pearson's Correlation Coefficient.
Inadequacy of micronutrient intakes was calculated using the EAR-cut point method (for calcium, folate, vitamin

Info for intereting r values for correlations

A value of r can be between -1 and +1.
r = 0.0-0.09 No correlation
r = 0.10-0.29 Weak correlation
r = 0.30-0.49 Moderate correlation
r = 0.5-1.0 Strong correlation
Any r and p ≥ 0.05 = No correlation
bove' or '18-30' years catergories where applicable

hod (for calcium, folate, vitamin C, zinc) and using full probability approach (for iron).
 Descriptive statistics for anthropometric mea

Statistic
mean
standard error (SE)
standard deviation (SD)
p25
p50 (median)
p75
Interquartile range (IQR)
min
max

Proprotion of adults by weight category according to WHO BMI classification

Weight Category

Underweight <18.5 kg/m2

Healthy weight 18.5-24.99 kg/m2
Overweight =>25.00-25.99 kg/m2
Obese =>30.0 kg/m2

Proprotion of adults who exceed WC cut-points

WC_Category
WC <80 cm
WC=>80 cm
WC =>88 cm

Correlation between % body fat from skinfolds vs. BIA: Pearsons correlation test
Pearson Correlation (r value)

p value
r anthropometric measurements
Waist % body fat
Circumference from % body fat
Height (cm) Weight (kg) BMI (kg/m2) (cm) skinfolds from BIA
166.5 61.5 22.2 71.9 22.0 25.7
0.7 1.0 0.4 1.5 0.7 0.8
6.9 10.1 3.5 14.7 6.9 7.6
161.0 55.0 19.8 67.0 18.0 21.0
166.0 60.0 21.8 71.0 21.0 26.0
173.0 68.0 23.8 77.0 26.0 30.0
12.0 13.0 4.0 10.0 8.0 9.0
150.0 38.0 15.2 31.0 7.0 6.0
181.0 88.0 33.2 164.0 40.0 45.0

Number (N) Percent (%)

12 12.6
68 71.6
13 13.7
2 2.1

Number (N) Percent (%)

81 85.3
7 7.4
7 7.4

.588

.000
Descriptive statistics for energy intake (kJ/d) (3-day food diary), energy expenditure (kJ/d) (3-day diary AND AAS survey)

Energy expenditure Energy expenditure (kJ/d) -

Statistic (kJ/d) - AAS 3 day diary
mean 1794.6 9902.7
standard deviation (SD) 2375.7 4977.5
standard error (SE) 243.7 510.7
p25 578.0 7600.0
p50 (median) 999.0 9990.0
p75 2123.0 12600.0
Interquartile range (IQR) 1545.0 5000.0
min 50.0 480.0
max 16224.0 31200.0

People meeting current physical activity recommendations using AASQ**

Number (≥ 480 kj/d) 75

% ≥ 480 kJ/d 79.80%
**Note: Current physical activity
recommendations for adults:
“150-300 mins moderate PA or 75-150 mins
vigorous PA across the week”
~ 480 kj/day

Correlation between AASQ vs 3DD: Pearsons correlation test

Pearson Correlation (r value) .058
p value .580
Note: You need to interpret the r value for correlation and the p value
e (kJ/d) (3-day diary AND AAS survey) and energy balance (kJ/d)

Energy intake (kJ/d) -

3 day diary Energy balance (kJ/d)
8617.4 -1285.1
3103.0 5910.8
318.4 606.4
7019.0 -4439.0
8284.0 -1816.0
9657.0 895.0
2638.0 5334.0
2050.0 -23010.0
26289.0 15369.0
DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR NUTRIENT INTAKE

Daily % energy
from fat - 3 Daily % energy from
Energy intake (kJ/d) - 3 day food carbohydrate - 3 day
Statistic day food record record food record
mean 8617.4 30.8 43.5
standard error (SE) 318.4 0.8 1.0
standard deviation (SD) 3103.0 8.3 10.1
p25 7019.0 25.0 38.0
p50 (median) 8284.0 30.0 44.0
p75 9657.0 37.0 50.0
Interquartile range (IQR) 2638.0 12.0 12.0
min 2050.0 8.0 10.0
max 26289.0 49.0 73.0

The EAR is estimated average requirement so that the mean of population needs for a nutrient. are as follows
The most recent recommendations from Nutrient Reference Value tables for 19-30y
· Calcium 840mg/d
· Vitamin C 30mg/d
· Folate 320ug/d
· Zinc women 6.5mg/d
. Iron 8mg/d

Percentage of female class population at risk of deficiency of various nutrients

Using 3 day food record
Number below EAR % below EAR Method
Calcium 50 52.63% Cut-point method
Folate 23 24.20% Cut-point method
Vitamin C 5 5.30% Cut-point method
Zinc women 11 11.60% Cut-point method

Using Probability
approach for iron(see
Iron Women 61 63.82% below)

Probablitity approach for iron as it "is known with certainty that the requirement distributions are not symmetrical for a
the proportion of individuals with intakes below the EAR will not reflect the population prevalence of nutrient inadequa
Ref: IOM 2000: Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin A, Vitamin K, Arsenic, Boron, Chromium, Copper, Iodine, Iron, Manga

Percentiles of Requirement Range usual intakes assoc Risk of No. with intake
Distribution with percentiles inadequate in range
intakes
2.5 1 1 12
5 3 0.96 4
10 5 0.93 10
20 7 0.85 15
30 8 0.75 5
 40 9 0.65 11
50 10 0.55 6
60 11 0.45 9
70 13 0.35 4
80 16 0.25 6
90 20 0.15 9
95 26 0.08 3
97.5 34 0.04 0
100 46 0 1
Total 95
At risk=N (%%/N) x 100

63.82% of female class population was at risk of iron deficiency.

Correlation between calcium intake (mg/d) from FFQ vs. 3-day food record: Pearsons correlation test
Pearson Correlation (r value) .375
p value .000
 Folate Vitamin C Zinc
intake intake intake
Daily % energy Daily % energy Calcium intake Iron intake (ug/d) - 3 (mg/d) - 3 (mg/d) - 3
from protein - 3 from alcohol - 3 (mg/d) - 3 day (mg/d) - 3 day day food day food day food
day food record day food record food record food record record record record
22.4 0.8 818.3 12.5 441.9 105.6 12.0
0.9 0.2 37.4 0.6 19.8 7.1 0.7
8.8 2.2 364.4 5.4 192.8 69.5 6.8
17.0 0.0 528.0 9.0 321.0 60.0 8.0
20.0 0.0 788.0 12.0 422.0 86.0 10.0
25.0 0.0 1023.0 15.0 530.0 129.0 13.0
8.0 0.0 495.0 6.0 209.0 69.0 5.0
11.0 0.0 140.0 2.0 52.0 9.0 2.0
72.0 12.0 2062.0 35.0 1000.0 333.0 35.0

nutrient. are as follows

ibutions are not symmetrical for all life stage and gender groups,
n prevalence of nutrient inadequacy. Instead, the full probability approach must be used.”
mium, Copper, Iodine, Iron, Manganese, Molybdenum, Nickel, Silicon, Vanadium, and Zinc (2000) accessed: http://books.nap.edu/openb

No x risk

12
3.84
9.30
12.75
3.75
 7.15
3.30
4.05
1.40
1.50
1.35
0.24
0.00
0
60.63
At risk=N (%%/N) x 100
63.82
was at risk of iron deficiency.

rsons correlation test

 FFQ Calcium FFQ Dairy Serves /
(mg/d) d
655.9 2.4
43.1 0.3
420.4 2.9
362.0 0.8
547.0 1.4
889.0 2.3
527.0 1.5
27.0 0.0
2117.0 15.0

: http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10026&page=571
Class distribution of nutrient intake - obtained from 3-day food record. Displayed using frequency histogram
Note:
When the data distribution shows a normal distribution curve we use mean ± SD
When the data distribution doesn't show a normal distribution curve we use median and interquartile range

Calcium Iron
Near normal Positively skewed

Folate Vit c
Normally distrubuted Positively skewed
Zinc
Positively skewed
ncy histogram

rquartile range