Discussion
We examined the agreement between EI estimated by the 7 d FD and 24 h DR – dietary assessment methods widely used in national dietary surveys – and TEEIn a Brazilian study validating both a 2 d FD and the 3 × 24 h DR (also AMPM) among eighty-three volunteers aged 20–60 years, they found that EI was underestimated by −28 and −33 % for the two dietary assessment methods, respectivelyIn the present study, 61 % of the participants were classified as AER, 34 % as UER and 5 % as OER with the 7 d DR. In the study by Nybacka In the study by Mosfegh Although there was good agreement between EI and TEEThe ability to rank individuals according to EI The weighted Adding the third recall did not seem to improve the ranking ability of EI estimated by 2 × 24 h DR in the correlations and cross-classification. Adding a third recall tended to increase over-reporting (from 12 % to 15 %). Based on remarks from interviewers, a possible explanation could be due to an exhaustion effect at the 3rd recall, and that participants did not take so much care in reporting corrections to the recall and leftovers to shorten the interview. A third recall, however, most likely improves the accuracy for intake of nutrients and food groups due to the large intra-variability in participants intake with only two recalls.