Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from Nutrition Journal and BioMed Central.

Open Access Short report

The feasibility and utility of grocery receipt analyses for dietary assessment

Sarah Levin Martin1*, Teresa Howell2, Yan Duan2 and Michele Walters2

Author Affiliations

1 Morehead State University, College of Education, Department of Health, Physical Education, and Sport Sciences at the time of this study, USA

2 Associate Professor of Nursing, Morehead State University, 150 University Blvd. Box 715, Morehead, Kentucky 40351, USA

For all author emails, please log on.

Nutrition Journal 2006, 5:10  doi:10.1186/1475-2891-5-10

Published: 30 March 2006

Abstract

Objective

To establish the feasibility and utility of a simple data collection methodology for dietary assessment.

Design

Using a cross-sectional design, trained data collectors approached adults (~20 – 40 years of age) at local grocery stores and asked whether they would volunteer their grocery receipts and answer a few questions for a small stipend ($1).

Methods

The grocery data were divided into 3 categories: "fats, oils, and sweets," "processed foods," and "low-fat/low-calorie substitutions" as a percentage of the total food purchase price. The questions assessed the shopper's general eating habits (eg, fast-food consumption) and a few demographic characteristics and health aspects (eg, perception of body size).

Statistical Analyses Performed. Descriptive and analytic analyses using non-parametric tests were conducted in SAS.

Results

Forty-eight receipts and questionnaires were collected. Nearly every respondent reported eating fast food at least once per month; 27% ate out once or twice a day. Frequency of fast-food consumption was positively related to perceived body size of the respondent (p = 0.02). Overall, 30% of the food purchase price was for fats, oils, sweets, 10% was for processed foods, and almost 6% was for low-fat/low-calorie substitutions. Households where no one was perceived to be overweight spent a smaller proportion of their food budget on fats, oils, and sweets than did households where at least one person was perceived to be overweight (p = 0.10); household where the spouse was not perceived to be overweight spent less on fats, oils, and sweets (p = 0.02) and more on low-fat/low-calorie substitutions (p = 0.09) than did households where the spouse was perceived to be overweight; and, respondents who perceived themselves to be overweight spent more on processed foods than did respondents who did not perceive themselves to be overweight (p = 0.06).

Conclusion

This simple dietary assessment method, although global in nature, may be a useful indicator of dietary practices as evidenced by its association with perceived weight status.