Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (9)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Little, P.
Right arrow Articles by Margetts, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Little, P.
Right arrow Articles by Margetts, B.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Family Practice Vol. 13, No. 5, 477-482
© Oxford University Press 1996


review-article

Dietary and exercise assessment in general practice

Paul Little and Barrie Margetts*

Aldermoor Health Centre Aldermoor Close, Southampton SO16 5ST
*Wessex Institute of Public Health Medicine, University of Southampton Southampton, UK.

BACKGROUND: Diet and physical activity are important in many conditions managed in primary care. Dietary and physical activity assessment is complex, has inherent inaccuracies related to self-reporting, and is only a small part of a larger context of developing effective intervention in primary care. However, for personalized assessment in routine clinical care, and for the assessment of different intervention strategies in a general practice research setting, validated life-style assessment tools are needed.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to discuss the requirements for assessment tools and to identify feasible validated assessment instruments for use in primary care.

METHODS: Potential tools were identified from a Medline search, UK Research Intelligence, and contact with groups known to be working in the area.

RESULTS: Several brief instruments assess mainly fat in the US diet but the limited range of foods covered and the setting of studies limits their generalizability. Only one tool developed for UK use—‘DINE’, which scores total fat, fibre and unsaturated fat—was identified which is both feasible and has documented reasonable validated characteristics. Even for this tool there are doubts about the validation ‘standard’. No diet or physical activity validation studies have used both subjects and health professionals from general practice settings.

CONCLUSION: There are very few feasible and validated dietary or physical activity assessment tools for use in clinical care or research in general practice, and doubts about the design and settings of published validation studies. Further research is needed to validate and develop a range of feasible life-style assessment tools with specified time and training requirements for use in primary care.

Keywords. Nutrition assessment, primary health care, exercises.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
cfpHome page
E. Gucciardi, S. C.-T. Wang, M. DeMelo, L. Amaral, and D. E. Stewart
Characteristics of men and women with diabetes: Observations during patients' initial visit to a diabetes education centre
Can Fam Physician, February 1, 2008; 54(2): 219 - 227.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Diabetes CareHome page
A. B.S. Nielsen, N. de Fine Olivarius, D. Gannik, C. Hindsberger, and H. Hollnagel
Structured Personal Diabetes Care in Primary Health Care Affects Only Women's HbA1c
Diabetes Care, May 1, 2006; 29(5): 963 - 969.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
BMJHome page
A. L. Kinmonth, A. Woodcock, S. Griffin, N. Spiegal, and M. J Campbell
Randomised controlled trial of patient centred care of diabetes in general practice: impact on current wellbeing and future disease risk
BMJ, October 31, 1998; 317(7167): 1202 - 1208.
[Abstract] [Full Text]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.