Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30096211›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Online dietary intake assessment using a graphical food frequency app (eNutri): Usability metrics from the EatWellUK study.

Rodrigo Zenun Franco, Rosalind Fallaize, Julie A Lovegrove, Faustina Hwang

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06675630 (Investigating Food Intake Across the Adult Life Course and Relevant Communication Strategies), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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.

NCT06675630 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Investigating Food Intake Across the Adult Life Course and Relevant Communication Strategies

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of ReadingRan2024 to 2025Enrolled336ConditionsIndividual Differences, Food Intake, Behaviour ChangeArmsEducation, Control
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Dietary Quality in Vegetarian and Omnivorous Female Students in Germany: A Retrospective Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rodrigo Zenun FrancoBiomedical Engineering Section, School of Biological Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1998-4367
Rosalind FallaizeHugh Sinclair Unit of Human Nutrition and Institute for Cardiovascular and Metabolic Research, University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom.
Julie A LovegroveHugh Sinclair Unit of Human Nutrition and Institute for Cardiovascular and Metabolic Research, University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom.
Faustina HwangBiomedical Engineering Section, School of Biological Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom.
University of Reading · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith widespread use of the internet, lifestyle and dietary data collection can now be facilitated using online questionnaires as opposed to paper versions. We have developed a graphical food frequency assessment app (eNutri), which is able to assess dietary intake using a validated food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) and provide personalised nutrition advice. FFQ user acceptance and evaluation have not been investigated extensively and only a few studies involving user acceptance of nutrition assessment and advice apps by older adults are published.

methodsA formative study with 20 participants (including n = 10 ≥60 years) assessed the suitability of this app for adults and investigated improvements to its usability. The outcomes of this formative study were applied to the final version of the application, which was deployed in an online study (EatWellUK) with 324 participants (including n = 53 ≥60 years) in the UK, using different devices (smartphones, tablets and laptops/desktops). Completion times were based on browser timestamps and usability was measured using the System Usability Scale (SUS), scoring between 0 and 100. Products with a SUS score higher than 70 are considered to be good.

resultsIn the EatWellUK study, SUS score median (n = 322) was 77.5 (IQR 15.0). Out of the 322 SUS questionnaire completions, 321 device screen sizes were detected by the app. Grouped by device screen size, small (n = 92), medium (n = 38) and large (n = 191) screens received median SUS scores of 77.5 (IQR 15.0), 75.0 (IQR 19.4) and 77.5 (IQR 16.25), respectively. The median SUS scores from younger (n = 268) and older participants (n = 53) were the same. The FFQ contained 157 food items, and the mean completion time was 13.1 minutes (95% CI 12.6-13.7 minutes). Small, medium and large screen devices resulted in completion times of 11.7 minutes (95% CI 10.9-12.6 minutes), 14.4 minutes (95% CI 12.9-15.9 minutes) and 13.6 minutes (95% CI 12.8-14.3 minutes), respectively.

conclusionsThe overall median SUS score of 77.5 and overall mean completion time of 13.3 minutes indicate good overall usability, and equally, comparable SUS scores and completion times across small, medium and large screen sizes indicates good usability across devices. This work is a step toward the promotion of wider uptake of online apps that can provide online dietary intake assessment at-scale, with the aim of addressing pressing epidemiological challenges.

Indexed as

Energy IntakeInternetNutrition AssessmentAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited KingdomYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID30096211
PMCPMC6086444
OpenAlexW2887798233

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.