Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28288657›Full record

ArticleThe international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity2017

Evaluation of a smartphone food diary application using objectively measured energy expenditure.

Felicity J Pendergast, Nicola D Ridgers, Anthony Worsley, Sarah A McNaughton

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

50 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Twenty years of behavioral nutrition- A reflection on the road less travelled.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Felicity J PendergastInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria, 3125, Australia. fpenderg@deakin.edu.au.
Nicola D RidgersInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria, 3125, Australia.
Anthony WorsleyInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria, 3125, Australia.
Sarah A McNaughtonInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria, 3125, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDietary assessment methods are limited in their ability to adequately measure food and beverage consumption. Smartphone applications may provide a novel method of dietary assessment to capture real-time food intake and the contextual factors surrounding eating occasions. The aim of this study is to evaluate the capability of a Smartphone meal diary app ("FoodNow") to measure food intake using a validated objective method for assessing energy expenditure among young adults.

methodsParticipants (18-30 years) used FoodNow over four non-consecutive days recording all eating occasions through a combination of written text, and/or optional images and voice recordings. A series of contextual questions were also completed. Participants wore the validated SenseWear Armband (BodyMedia Inc, USA) during the same period to measure free-living energy expenditure. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) estimated the reliability of FoodNow to measure estimated energy intake compared to measured energy expenditure.

resultsNinety participants (71 female, 19 male; mean age = 24.9 ± 4.1 years) were recruited to use the FoodNow app to record their eating occasions. Thirteen were excluded as they did not meet minimum requirements for number of reporting days (n = 3) or SenseWear Armband wear time (5 days of 11 h), while 21 participants were excluded after being identified as mis-reporters (Huang method). Among the remaining sample (n = 56), reliability between estimated energy intake and measured energy expenditure was high (ICC, 95% CI: 0.75, 0.61-0.84).

conclusionsFoodNow is a suitable method for capturing estimated energy intake data from young adults. Despite wide levels of agreement at the individual level (-3709 kJ to 2056 kJ), at the group level, FoodNow appears to have potential as a dietary assessment tool. This new dietary assessment method will offer an alternative and novel method of dietary assessment which is capable of collecting both estimated energy intake and contextual factors surrounding eating occasions. Information collected may be used to inform future public health messages or research interventions.

Indexed as

Diet RecordsEnergy IntakeMobile ApplicationsSmartphoneAdultDietEatingEnergy MetabolismFemaleHumansMaleMealsMonitoring, AmbulatoryReproducibility of ResultsYoung AdultDietary assessmentEnergy intakeEvaluationSenseWear armbandSmartphone applications

Identifiers

PMID28288657
PMCPMC5348892

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.