Tests of sunspot number sequences: 3. Effects of regression procedures on the calibration of historic sunspot data

We use sunspot group observations from the Royal Greenwich Observatory (RGO) to investigate the effects of intercalibrating data from observers with different visual acuities. The tests are made by counting the number of groups RB above a variable cut-off threshold of observed total whole-spot area (uncorrected for foreshortening) to simulate what a lower acuity observer would have seen. The synthesised annual means of RB are then re-scaled to the full observed RGO group number RA using a variety of regression techniques. It is found that a very high correlation between RA and RB (rAB > 0.98) does not prevent large errors in the intercalibration (for example sunspot maximum values can be over 30 % too large even for such levels of rAB). In generating the backbone sunspot number (RBB), Svalgaard and Schatten (2015, this issue) force regression fits to pass through the scatter plot origin which generates unreliable fits (the residuals do not form a normal distribution) and causes sunspot cycle amplitudes to be exaggerated in the intercalibrated data. It is demonstrated that the use of Quantile-Quantile (“Q  Q”) plots to test for a normal distribution is a useful indicator of erroneous and misleading regression fits. Ordinary least squares linear fits, not forced to pass through the origin, are sometimes reliable (although the optimum method used is shown to be different when matching peak and average sunspot group numbers). However, other fits are only reliable if non-linear regression is used. From these results it is entirely possible that the inflation of solar cycle amplitudes in the backbone group sunspot number as one goes back in time, relative to related solar-terrestrial parameters, is entirely caused by the use of inappropriate and non-robust regression techniques to calibrate the sunspot data.

Reproducibility of the online Food4Me food-frequency questionnaire for estimating dietary intakes across Europe

Background: Accurate dietary assessment is key to understanding nutrition-related outcomes and is essential for estimating dietary change in nutrition-based interventions. Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the pan-European reproducibility of the Food4Me food-frequency questionnaire (FFQ) in assessing the habitual diet of adults. Methods: Participantsfromthe Food4Me study, a 6-mo,Internet-based, randomizedcontrolled trial of personalized nutrition conducted in the United Kingdom, Ireland, Spain, Netherlands, Germany, Greece, and Poland were included. Screening and baseline data (both collected before commencement of the intervention) were used in the present analyses, and participants were includedonly iftheycompleted FFQs at screeningand at baselinewithin a 1-mo timeframebeforethe commencement oftheintervention. Sociodemographic (e.g., sex andcountry) andlifestyle[e.g.,bodymass index(BMI,inkg/m2)and physical activity] characteristics were collected. Linear regression, correlation coefficients, concordance (percentage) in quartile classification, and Bland-Altman plots for daily intakes were used to assess reproducibility. Results: In total, 567 participants (59% female), with a mean 6 SD age of 38.7 6 13.4 y and BMI of 25.4 6 4.8, completed bothFFQswithin 1 mo(mean 6 SD: 19.26 6.2d).Exact plus adjacent classification oftotal energy intakeinparticipants was highest in Ireland (94%) and lowest in Poland (81%). Spearman correlation coefficients (r) in total energy intake between FFQs ranged from 0.50 for obese participants to 0.68 and 0.60 in normal-weight and overweight participants, respectively. Bland-Altman plots showed a mean difference between FFQs of 210 kcal/d, with the agreement deteriorating as energy intakes increased. There was little variation in reproducibility of total energy intakes between sex and age groups. Conclusions: The online Food4Me FFQ was shown to be reproducible across 7 European countries when administered within a 1-mo period to a large number of participants. The results support the utility of the online Food4Me FFQ as a reproducible tool across multiple European populations. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01530139.