Accuracy of computerized nutrient databases is an important consideration in selecting a nutrient analysis system. We project compared the nutrient content of daily menus calculated from 4 microcomputer programs to chemical analysis of menus analyzed for the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) trial. Thirty-six menus were entered at 2 independent DASH sites using the ESHA Food Processor, Minnesota Nutrition Data System, Moore's Extended Nutrient Database, and Nutritionist IV databases. Food prepared according to these menus was chemically analyzed at the Food Analysis Laboratory Control Center at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Department of Biochemistry, Blacksburg. Estimates for 13 nutrients were compared: energy, total fat, saturated fat, monounsaturated fat, polyunsaturated fat, carbohydrate, protein, cholesterol, calcium, potassium, magnesium, iron, and sodium. The overall intraclass correlation between the 2 sites' data entry was 0.998; thus, values were averaged for analyses. Databases varied significantly in their mean deviations from chemical analyses values for saturated, monounsaturated, and polyunsaturated fatty acids, potassium, magnesium, and iron (P < .05); however, these differences were small (< 10%). Absolute deviations, which estimate the combined effect of bias and precision, were significantly different among databases for energy, saturated fatty acids, and polyunsaturated acids. Absolute differences from the laboratory values varied by < 15%, except for iron. All 4 databases were comparable in accuracy and precision and performed well. Criteria for database selection depends not only on overall database accuracy, especially for nutrients of interest, but also on the ease of use of the program, relevant features of the associated software; and cost.