ArticlePublic health nutrition2019
Validation of a novel image-weighed technique for monitoring food intake and estimation of portion size in hospital settings: a pilot study.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Digital technologies in inpatient foodservice and nutrition care: a systematic scoping review of intake, plate waste, measurement, and implementation.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Pooled it
- Navigating next-gen nutrition care using artificial intelligence-assisted dietary assessment tools-a scoping review of potential applications.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Review
- Automated food intake tracking requires depth-refined semantic segmentation to rectify visual-volume discordance in long-term care homes.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- A Primer for the Evaluation and Integration of Dietary Intake and Physical Activity Digital Measurement Tools into Nutrition and Dietetics Practice.Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics · 2022Article
- Man or machine? Will the digital transition be able to automatize dietary intake data collection?Public health nutrition · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveOptimal nutrition for hospital patients is crucial and routine monitoring of patients' nutrient intake is imperative. However, personalised monitoring and customised intervention using traditional methods is challenging and labour-intensive, consequently it is often neglected in hospital settings. The present pilot study aimed to examine the reliability and validity of the Dietary Intake Monitoring System (DIMS) against the weighed food method (WFM).
designThe DIMS 2.0 is composed of an integrated digital camera, weighing scale, radio-frequency identification sensor and WIFI connection for real-time image and weight dietary data acquisition and analysis. The DIMS equipment was used to collect data for a paired set of meals both before and after meal consumption at lunchtime.
settingOdense University Hospital, Denmark. SUBJECTS: Photos and weights of seventeen patient meals were captured.
resultsThe results showed a significant correlation between DIMS and WFM for energy (r=0·99, P<0·01) and protein intake (r=0·98, P<0·01). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) revealed a high degree of agreement among the four non-trained assessors for estimates of portion size of each food item before (0·88, P<0·01) and after consumption (0·99, P<0·01). The ICC for energy and protein intake were 0·99 (P<0·01) and 0·99 (P<0·01), respectively. Bland-Altman plots revealed no systematic bias.
conclusionsConsidering the huge benefits associated with routine monitoring, technological advances have made it possible to develop a novel, easy-to-use DIMS that, according to the findings, is a valid alternative for use in hospital settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.