Energy intake 
The linear relationship between TEE and the reported EI by 24 h DR and 7 d FD is illustrated in 
Linear relationship between total energy expenditure measured by the doubly labelled water (TEEThe mean and mean difference of the reported EI by 7 d FD and 24 h DR compared with TEE
Mean daily energy measured by DLW and dietary assessment methods, weight change, and daily steps and self-reported time spent on moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) the last week(mean values and standard deviations; 95 % confidence intervals)Significant at the 0·05 level (two-tailed).Paired sample Pearson’s correlation coefficient.EI estimate where intrapersonal (or day-to-day) variation from the group’s reported intake has been removed by the MSM method.PAEE = TEESignificant at the 0·01 level (two-tailed).The mean reported EI by the 7 d FR and 2 × 24 h DR method was 9·5 MJ/d (95% CI (9·0, 9·9)) (males = 10·7 MJ/d; females = 8·5 MJ/d) and 11·5 MJ/d (95% CI (10·8, 12·2)) (males = 13·2 MJ/d; females = 10·2 MJ/d), respectively. 3 × 24 h DR provided a mean EI similar to the 2 × 24 h DR of 11·6 MJ/d (95% CI (11·0, 12·3)) (males = 13·1 MJ/d; females = 10·6 MJ/d). TEEAll Pearson’s correlation coefficients were statistically significant for both dietary assessment methods and TEEBland–Altman limits of agreement were narrower for 7 d FR (
Difference between energy intakes (EI) calculated from the 7-d web-based food diary (7 d FD) (a), and the 2 × 24 h dietary recall (2 × 24 h DR) (b) and energy expenditure (TEEThere were no statistically significant weight changes in the participants during the study period with the two dietary assessment methods (