title: Estimating dietary costs of low-income women in California: a comparison of 2 approaches.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Currently, no simplified approach to estimating food costs exists for a large, nationally representative sample.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  The objective was to compare 2 approaches for estimating individual daily diet costs in a population of low-income women in California.
  
  
  METHODS
  Cost estimates based on time-intensive method 1 (three 24-h recalls and associated food prices on receipts) were compared with estimates made by using less intensive method 2 [a food-frequency questionnaire (FFQ) and store prices]. Low-income participants (n = 121) of USDA nutrition programs were recruited. Mean daily diet costs, both unadjusted and adjusted for energy, were compared by using Pearson correlation coefficients and the Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement between methods.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Energy and nutrient intakes derived by the 2 methods were comparable; where differences occurred, the FFQ (method 2) provided higher nutrient values than did the 24-h recall (method 1). The crude daily diet cost was $6.32 by the 24-h recall method and $5.93 by the FFQ method (P = 0.221). The energy-adjusted diet cost was $6.65 by the 24-h recall method and $5.98 by the FFQ method (P < 0.001).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Although the agreement between methods was weaker than expected, both approaches may be useful. Additional research is needed to further refine a large national survey approach (method 2) to estimate daily dietary costs with the use of this minimal time-intensive method for the participant and moderate time-intensive method for the researcher.
authors: Program in International and Community Nutrition and the Department of Nutrition, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA.
authors: Grant J
authors: GJ
authors: Aaron
authors: Nancy L
authors: NL
authors: Keim
authors: Adam
authors: A
authors: Drewnowski
authors: Marilyn S
authors: MS
authors: Townsend
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D002140:California; D003132:Commerce; D003365:Costs and Cost Analysis; D004032:Diet / Q000191:economics*; D015930:Diet Records; D004034:Diet Surveys; D002149:Energy Intake; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007182:Income; D011939:Mental Recall; D011203:Poverty; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D014481:United States
references: Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):307-10
references: 2868172
references: Ann Epidemiol. 1999 Apr;9(3):178-87
references: 10192650
references: Lancet. 1995 Oct 21;346(8982):1085-7
references: 7564793
references: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1999 Aug;8(8):721-5
references: 10744133
references: Nutr Health. 1999;13(2):45-60
references: 10453450
references: J Am Diet Assoc. 2004 Apr;104(4):595-603
references: 15054345
references: J Am Diet Assoc. 2011 May;111(5):721-6
references: 21515119
references: Am J Epidemiol. 1997 Nov 15;146(10):856-69
references: 9384206
references: Nutr Today. 2010 Nov;44(6):246-249
references: 20368762
references: J Am Diet Assoc. 2002 Jan;102(1):39-45
references: 11794500
references: Public Health Nutr. 1999 Dec;2(4):505-12
references: 10656469
references: J Nutr. 2001 Jun;131(6):1738-45
references: 11385061
references: Am J Clin Nutr. 1979 Dec;32(12):2546-59
references: 506977
references: Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Apr;89(4):1220-6
references: 19225114
references: Am J Clin Nutr. 2003 May;77(5):1171-8
references: 12716668
references: J Am Diet Assoc. 2001 Jul;101(7):751-61
references: 11478471
references: J Epidemiol Community Health. 2012 Jun;66(6):530-5
references: 21148819
references: Am J Clin Nutr. 1983 Jun;37(6):986-95
references: 6846242
references: Eur J Clin Nutr. 1997 Jun;51 Suppl 2:S8-15
references: 9222718
references: J Am Diet Assoc. 2009 May;109(5):814-22
references: 19394467
references: Public Health Nutr. 2002 Dec;5(6A):915-23
references: 12633516
references: Eur J Clin Nutr. 1993 Nov;47(11):776-86
references: 8287847