Posted: December 7th, 2014

Comparison of relative validity of nutrient intake estimated by comprehensive and grief-type self-administered diet history questionnaires against 16 d dietary records in Japanese adults

Project description
Dear writer or administration,

This paper goes for nutritional epidemiology class. There is no option for that but epi and statistic are close. The paper need a writer with good background about nutrition as well but more epidemiology.
The instruction is to read the article below
Comparison of relative validity of nutrient intake estimated by comprehensive and grief-type self-administered diet history questionnaires against 16 d dietary records in Japanese adults
Then answer the questions in the attached document. I know one page might be not enough but answers can be in bullet points from 1-10
Just clear answer and complete without making it essay.
Please this is final paper and no time for revision. So it has to be clear and strait forward.
The instructor trying to test our understanding for the concepts and that is what I need to clarify in my paper.
THE ARTICLE IS ATTACHED IN PDF FILE. THE INSTRUCTOR TYPED THE ARTICLE AND I BELIEVE SHE HAS SOMETHING IN MIND AS IT DIFFER THAN THE ONE YOU MIGHT HAVE ONLINE. SHE SAID IT IS OLD ARTICLE BUT I FOUND ONE IN THE INTERNET EXACTLY SAME BUT FOR 2011 AND DIFFERS IN WORDING ONLY. YOU CAN REFER TO THE ONE ONLINE TO HELP YOU MODIFYING STUFF AS IT LOOKS UPDATED. BUT THE INSTRUCTOR WANT US TO READ THE ONE SHE GAVE, WHICH IS THE ONE I ATTACHED.
THE QUESTIONS ALSO ATTACHED
PLEASE BEFORE STARTING SEND ME TO MAKE SURE ALL CLEAR AND UNDERSTANDABLE FOR YOU DEAR.
———-
Added on 05.12.2014 23:16
Attached the files. Article and the questions. Please try to be clear and specific and do it in bullet point so i can recognize each answer goes to which question

Full Name
NUTR 543 Take Home Final Exam Fall 2014
Read the entire article BEFORE you answer the following questions. Submit a hard-copy of your responses to class on Tuesday 9 Dec 2014. Write your name on the top left corner of this page and use it as your cover page, and then staple it to your response document. (Your response document should NOT contain your name.) Use Times New Roman, font size 12, and doubl e-spaced.
Possible Points Score 1. Describe briefly the main purpose of the study, and how the objectives were 3 accomplished. 2. Comment on the appropriateness of the statistical approach. What other statistical methods could be used to assess validity? 3 3. Based on the description of the study design, i I I ustrate the ti me sequence of events for data collection. Mark which diet history questionnaire (DGQ) and brief-type diet history questionnaire (BD HQ) are being evaluated. (You may draw this on your paper if you are unfamiliar with using the drawing tools in Word.) Comment on the appropriateness of the study design to assess relative validity of the DHQ and BDHQ. 5 2 If the study design is appropriate, support your position. If the study design is flawed, suggest an alternative approach for evaluating the validity of the DHQ and BDHQ. 5 4. In li nes 97-108, the authors compare differences i n means of the crude nutrient intake estimates with the first diet history questionnaire (D HQ1) and the first brief-type diet history questionnaire (BDHQ1). According to the results, which of the 2 energy-adjusted methods have “better” results, or are they relatively similar? Support your response with the reported results. 4 5. Refer to Table 1. Reported mean i ntake esti mates are energy-adj usted usi ng the residual and energy-density methods. For each method, how many nutrients were overestimated (or underestimated) by DHQ1 and BDHQ1 when compared to DR? 4 6. How do the results from Items 4 & 5 above relate to the validity of DHQ1 and BDHQ1? 5 7. Refer to Table 2. Examine the crude, energy-adjustment by residual, and energy-adjustment by density correlations. First look at the col umns for women, and compare the DHQ1 correlations across. Now compare the BDHQ1 correlations across. Comment on how the correlations differ from crude, residual adjustment, and density adjustment. Examine the columns for men. How do the correlation patterns differ from women? 5 5 8. In lines 121-123, authors state that all de-attenuated correlation values improved 1.0 to 10.4 times the original values, but data were not shown.

PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT 🙂