Evidence Hub

Validation of a food frequency questionnaire to assess intake of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids in subjects with and without major depressive disorder

Sublette ME, Segal-Isaacson CJ, Cooper TB, Fekri S, Vanegas N, Galfalvy HC, Oquendo MA, Mann JJ

Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 2011

34 participants

Abstract

The role of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) in psychiatric illness is a topic of public health importance. This report describes development and biomarker validation of a 21-item, self-report food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) intended for use in psychiatric research to assess intake of α-linolenic acid (18:3n-3 [ALA]), docosahexaenoic acid (22:6n-3 [DHA]), and eicosapentaenoic acid (20:5n-3 [EPA]). In a cross-sectional study conducted from September 2006 to September 2008, sixty-one ethnically diverse adult participants with (n=34) and without (n=27) major depressive disorder completed this n-3 PUFA FFQ and provided a plasma sample. Plasma levels of n-3 PUFAs EPA and DHA, and n-6 PUFA arachidonic acid (20:4n-6 [AA]) were quantified by gas chromatography. Using Spearman's ρ, FFQ-estimated intake correlated with plasma levels of DHA (r=0.50; P<0.0001) and EPA (r=0.38; P=0.002), but not with ALA levels (r=0.22; P=0.086). Participants were classified into quartiles by FFQ-estimated intake and plasma PUFA concentrations. Efficacy of the FFQ to rank individuals into same or adjacent plasma quartiles was 83% for DHA, 78.1% for EPA, and 70.6% for ALA; misclassification into extreme quartiles was 4.9% for DHA, 6.5% for EPA, and 8.2% for ALA. FFQ-estimated EPA intake and plasma EPA were superior to plasma AA levels as predictors of the plasma AA to EPA ratio. This brief FFQ can provide researchers and clinicians with valuable information concerning dietary intake of DHA and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case-control, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 34 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free