PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 3802847

Quality control in the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial Nutrition Modality.

Abstract

One of the principal objectives of the MRFIT was to teach and motivate participants assigned to the SI group to adhere to a fat-controlled dietary regimen over the course of the trial. The magnitude of the trial (with more than 12,000 participants, half of them assigned to the SI protocol, to be followed for at least 6 years in 22 separate centers) presented new challenges for maintenance of quality control over a nutrition intervention program. Collection of data to monitor changes in dietary intake over time in SI and UC groups, as well as information to assess dietary adherence levels in SI participants also presented large-scale challenges in maintenance of quality control. The MRFIT formulated many of its initial nutrition intervention and data collection decisions based on experience of the earlier National Diet Heart Study (NDHS). In order to avoid coding 7-day dietary records by local clinic nutritionists (as in NDHS), the trial opted for collection of 24-hour dietary recalls that were coded centrally at the Nutrition Coding Center. It necessitated extra attention to training and certification of clinic nutritionist-interviewers to be certain that NCC coders had sufficiently precise information about all foods entered on dietary recall forms. Since dietary intake data were collected over a time span of approximately 10 years, procedures for updating the food composition database and coding rules were a necessity. Continuing attention to training and monitoring of performance of clinic nutritionist-interviewers also was important. The MRFIT nutrition intervention program was designed with the need for interclinic comparability of intervention techniques in mind. This required not only development of study-wide nutrition intervention materials, but also necessitated ongoing attention to staff training and monitoring procedures in order to ensure intercenter comparability of efforts. The success of the nutrition intervention modality depended upon the continuing efforts of the nutrition counselors not only to achieve dietary adherence but also to monitor levels of dietary adherence over time. The NDHS experience served as a springboard for designing the MRFIT nutrition intervention and data collection procedures. It is hoped that techniques for maintaining and monitoring quality control over the MRFIT nutrition modality as outlined in this chapter may prove useful to future planners.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J L Tillotson, D D Gorder, A G DuChene, P V Grambsch, J Wenz. 1986. Quality control in the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial Nutrition Modality.. https://doi.org/10.1016/0197-2456(86)90160-1

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Assessing the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system: digital vs plaster dental casts.

INTRODUCTION: The purposes of this study were to determine whether the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system (ABO OGS) can be assessed accurately from digital dental casts and whether there are statistical differences between digital and plaster dental casts in scoring the ABO OGS. METHODS: Thirty posttreatment plaster dental casts were selected and scanned by OrthoCAD (Cadent, Carlstadt, NJ) to produce 30 corresponding digital dental casts. The plaster and digital casts were compared by using the criteria of the ABO OGS. Because the data were ordinal, a nonparametic statistical analysis was used. RESULTS: The Wilcoxon test for paired samples showed significant differences between the plaster and digital casts for occlusal contacts, occlusal relationships, and total scores (P <.05). No significant differences were found for alignment, marginal ridges, overjet, and interproximal contacts. Buccolingual inclination was not included in this study because of inability to perform proper measurements with the OrthoCAD program. Mean differences of points deducted ranged from .03 point for marginal ridges to 5.07 points for the total score. The variable with the most points deducted related to occlusal relationships, and the fewest points were deducted for interproximal contacts. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this study, the current OrthoCAD program (version 2.2) was not adequate for scoring all parameters as required by the ABO OGS.

Certification↗