Reliability Estimates For assessing Meal Timing Derived From Longitudinal Repeated 24-Hour Dietary Recalls

BACKGROUND: Regulating meal timing may have efficacy for improving metabolic health for preventing or managing chronic disease. However, the reliability of measuring meal timing with commonly used dietary assessment tools needs characterization prior to investigating meal timing and health outcomes in epidemiologic studies. OBJECTIVES: to evaluate the reliability of estimating meal timing parameters, including overnight fasting duration, the midpoint of overnight fasting time, the number of daily eating episodes, the period with the largest percentage of daily caloric intake, and late last eating episode (\u3e 09:00 pm) from repeated 24-h dietary recalls (24HRs). METHODS: Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), Light\u27s Kappa estimates, and 95% CIs were calculated from repeated 24HR administered in 3 epidemiologic studies: The United States-based Interactive Diet and Activity Tracking in AARP (IDATA) study (n = 996, 6 24HR collected over 12-mo), German EPIC-Potsdam Validation Study (European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition Potsdam Germany cohort) (n = 134, 12 24HR collected over 12-mo) and EPIC-Potsdam BMBF-II Study (Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung ) (n = 725, 4 24HR collected over 36 mo). RESULTS: Measurement reliability of overnight fasting duration based on a single 24HR was poor in all studies [ICC range: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.23, 0.32 - 0.46; 95% CI: 0.43, 0.50]. Reliability was moderate with 3 24HR (ICC range: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.47, 0.58 in IDATA, 0.62; 95% CI: 0.52, 0.69 in the EPIC-Potsdam Validation Study, and 0.72; 95% CI: 0.70-0.75 in the EPIC-Potsdam BMBF-II Study). Results were similar for the midpoint of overnight fasting time and the number of eating episodes. Reliability of measuring late eating was fair in IDATA (Light\u27s Kappa: 0.30; 95% CI: 0.21, 0.39) and slight in the EPIC-Potsdam Validation study and the EPIC-Potsdam BMBF-II study (Light\u27s Kappa: 0.19; 95% CI: 0.15, 0.25 and 0.09; 95% CI: 0.06, 0.12, respectively). Reliability estimates differed by sex, BMI, weekday, and season of 24HR administration in some studies. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that ≥ 3 24HR over a 1-3-y period are required for reliable estimates of meal timing variables

Fruit and Vegetable Intake, Food Security, Barriers to Healthy Eating, and Empowerment Among Dietetic Interns and Physician Assistant Interns: A Cross-Sectional Pilot Study

Students are required to complete supervised practice hours prior to becoming Registered Dietitians and Physician Assistants. Research suggests that environmental and social factors affect dietetic interns’ diets during their internship, although these factors have not been studied among physician assistant interns. This cross-sectional study utilized an online survey to compare dietetic interns’ (n = 81) and physician assistant interns’ (n = 79) fruit and vegetable intake, food security, barriers to healthy eating, and empowerment for making healthy dietary choices during an internship. Differences were assessed via independent t-tests and chi-square distributions. The significance was set at p \u3c 0.05. Dietetic interns had a higher vegetable intake (p = 0.002) while physician assistant interns had higher rates of food insecurity (p = 0.040). Dietetic interns reported a greater impact on their dietary choices due to mental fatigue (p = 0.006), while physician assistant interns’ dietary choices were more heavily impacted by peer influence, interactions with patients, and interactions with preceptors (p \u3c 0.05). There was not a group difference in overall empowerment (p = 0.157), although both groups rated empowerment for asking for help with food and nutrition challenges the lowest of the empowerment sub-items. Addressing interns’ unique needs may support students’ educational success and wellbeing once they are professionals, promote a diverse workforce, and ensure optimal care for patients

Factors Influencing Dietetic Interns\u27 Dietary Habits During Supervised Practice

Supervised practice is a prerequisite to becoming a registered dietitian. Research suggests that environmental and social factors may affect dietary choices. This focus group research aimed to gather opinions from dietetic interns to understand what factors related to supervised practice, if any, affected their dietary habits. Qualitative data were collected via seven recorded virtual focus groups in which trained moderators facilitated a discussion using a series of controlled questions. Participants, dietetic interns (n = 42) who were currently completing or had completed their supervised practice within the previous six months, attended one of seven virtual focus groups. Each focus group had five to eight participants. Transcripts were separately coded by two trained researchers using a grounded theory approach to identify themes and subthemes. Researchers discussed any disagreements in coding and established a consensus. Elements related to the dietetic internship were observed to influence participants’ dietary choices. Main themes included time, finances, food access and availability, physical and mental effects, non-supervised practice factors, and social factors. Dietetic programs and preceptors should explore ways to raise interns’ awareness and minimize the potential negative impacts of these factors on interns’ dietary habits to improve their overall internship experience

Self-Graded Assignments

In 2015, the USU Dietetic Internship added a self-grading element to case study assignments. Under this protocol, interns evaluate their own completed case studies against detailed rubrics and give themselves a score out of ten points. Additional feedback and final scores are given by program faculty. Evaluation of this protocol shows an increase in the average score of all case studies, as well as an increase in individual interns’ scores by more than 2.0 points from the first to last case study, compared to an increase of 0.7 points the first year

Feedback: A Practical Framework to Maximize Growth and Student Success

Higher education is designed to give feedback, but how do our students receive that feedback? The most important message can be lost if the feedback leads a student to feel demoralized and give up. By learning how you provide and accept feedback and how others interpret feedback, conversations about where to go next can be more effective. In this interactive educational session, we will identify the three types of feedback, the triggers associated with receiving feedback, and the tools you will practice to develop more effective feedback skills

Cheating Lessons: A Multidisciplinary Examination of Course Design for Student Success

Academic dishonesty is a challenging problem in higher education. In many cases, students who resort to cheating or plagiarism often feel compelled to do so because of underdeveloped academic skills, uncertainty about their abilities, and/or a high-pressure environment. As instructors, we play a role in setting students up for success by creating environments that encourage honest reflection, critical thinking, ethical interactions, and original work. The members of this panel read and discussed Cheating Lessons: Learning from Academic Dishonesty , a book by James Lang. According to Lang, cheating is an inappropriate response to a learning environment that isn\u27t working for a student. There are, however, many ways to reduce the pressure to cheat by constructing learning environments that support intrinsic motivation, build self-efficacy, and encourage mastery-level learning. This presentation will review three main ideas covered in the Cheating Lessons book: (1) a brief history of cheating in higher education, (2) examples of course design for a nearly cheating-free classroom, and (3) ways to respond to cheating and/or develop university-wide policies that promote academic integrity. Panel members will also discuss specific teaching strategies they have implemented in an effort to encourage academic honesty, increase confidence and learning, and build relationships of trust

Factors Influencing Dietetic Interns’ Dietary Habits during Supervised Practice

Supervised practice is a prerequisite to becoming a registered dietitian. Research suggests that environmental and social factors may affect dietary choices. This focus group research aimed to gather opinions from dietetic interns to understand what factors related to supervised practice, if any, affected their dietary habits. Qualitative data were collected via seven recorded virtual focus groups in which trained moderators facilitated a discussion using a series of controlled questions. Participants, dietetic interns (n = 42) who were currently completing or had completed their supervised practice within the previous six months, attended one of seven virtual focus groups. Each focus group had five to eight participants. Transcripts were separately coded by two trained researchers using a grounded theory approach to identify themes and subthemes. Researchers discussed any disagreements in coding and established a consensus. Elements related to the dietetic internship were observed to influence participants’ dietary choices. Main themes included time, finances, food access and availability, physical and mental effects, non-supervised practice factors, and social factors. Dietetic programs and preceptors should explore ways to raise interns’ awareness and minimize the potential negative impacts of these factors on interns’ dietary habits to improve their overall internship experience