Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T18:05:54.002Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dietary Reference Intakes: summary of applications in dietary assessment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2006

Suzanne P Murphy  and
Mary I Poos
Suzanne P Murphy
Affiliation:
Cancer Research Center of Hawaii, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI, USA
Mary I Poos*
Affiliation:
Food and Nutrition Board, Institute of Medicine, National Academies, 500 Fifth Street NW, Washington, DC 20001, USA
*
*Corresponding author: Email mpoos@nas.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objective:

To summarise the applications and appropriate use of Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) as guidance for nutrition and health research professionals in the dietary assessment of groups and individuals.

Design:

Key points from the Institute of Medicine report, Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment, are summarised in this paper. The different approaches for using DRIs to evaluate the intakes of groups vs. the intakes of individuals are highlighted.

Results:

Each of the new DRIs is defined and its role in the dietary assessment of groups and individuals is described. Two methods of group assessment and a new method for quantitative assessment of individuals are described. Illustrations are provided on appropriate use of the Estimated Average Requirement (EAR), the Adequate Intake (AI) and the Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) in dietary assessment.

Conclusions:

Dietary assessment of groups or individuals must be based on estimates of usual (long-term) intake. The EAR is the appropriate DRI to use in assessing groups and individuals. The AI is of limited value in assessing nutrient adequacy, and cannot be used to assess the prevalence of inadequacy. The UL is the appropriate DRI to use in assessing the proportion of a group at risk of adverse health effects. It is inappropriate to use the Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) or a group mean intake to assess the nutrient adequacy of groups.

Keywords

Dietary Reference Intake (DRI)Estimated Average Requirement (EAR)Adequate Intake (AI)Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL)Assessing individual intakesAssessing group intakesPrevalence of inadequacyEAR cut-pointProbability approach
Type
Research Article
Information
Public Health Nutrition , Volume 5 , Issue 6a , December 2002 , pp. 843 - 849
Copyright
Copyright © CAB International 2002

References

1Institute of Medicine. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2000.Google Scholar
2National Research Council. Recommended Dietary Allowances, 10th ed. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1989.Google Scholar
3Health and Welfare Canada. Nutrition Recommendations. The Report of the Scientific Review Committee, 1990. Ottawa: Canadian Government Publishing Centre, 1990.Google Scholar
4National Research Council. Nutrient Adequacy. Assessment Using Food Consumption Surveys. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1986.Google Scholar
5Institute of Medicine. Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium, Phosphorus, Magnesium, Vitamin D, and Fluoride. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1997.Google Scholar
6Institute of Medicine. Dietary Reference Intakes for Thiamin, Riboflavin, Niacin, Vitamin B6, Folate, Vitamin B12, Pantothenic Acid, Biotin, and Choline. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1998.Google Scholar
7Institute of Medicine. Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin C, Vitamin E, Selenium, and Carotenoids. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2000.Google Scholar
8Institute of Medicine. Dietary Reference Intakes: A Risk Assessment Model for Establishing Upper Intake Levels for Nutrients. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1998.Google Scholar
9Carriquiry, Al. Assessing the prevalence of nutrient inadequacy. Public Health Nutr. 1999; 2: 23–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10Nusser, SM, Carriquiry, AL, Dodd, KW, Fuller, WA. A semiparametric transformation approach to estimating usual daily intake distributions. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1996; 91: 1440–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar