Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30459148›Full record

ReviewJMIR mHealth and uHealth2018

Mobile Ecological Momentary Diet Assessment Methods for Behavioral Research: Systematic Review.

Susan M Schembre, Yue Liao, Sydney G O'Connor, Melanie D Hingle, Shu-En Shen, Katarina G Hamoy, Jimi Huh, Genevieve F Dunton, Rick Weiss, Cynthia A Thomson and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
11.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

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

62 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 91 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Development and usability of a mobile ecological momentary assessment platform for dietary surveillance in the U.S.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

11 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Susan M SchembreDepartment of Behavioral Science, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9945-7136
Yue LiaoDepartment of Behavioral Science, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9384-336X
Sydney G O'ConnorInstitute for Health Promotion & Disease Prevention, Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0146-562X
Melanie D HingleDepartment of Nutritional Sciences, College of Agriculture & Life Sciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6696-5601
Shu-En ShenDepartment of Kinesiology, Wiess School of Natural Sciences, Rice University, Houston, TX, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7578-5397
Katarina G HamoyDepartment of Health and Human Performance, College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences, University of Houston, Houston, TX, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5286-0430
Jimi HuhInstitute for Health Promotion & Disease Prevention, Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2727-5966
Genevieve F DuntonInstitute for Health Promotion & Disease Prevention, Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4129-3829
Rick WeissViocare, Inc, Princeton, NJ, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2308-9864
Cynthia A ThomsonDepartment of Health Promotion Sciences, Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3645-7048
Carol J BousheyEpidemiology Program, University of Hawaii Cancer Center, Honolulu, HI, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7517-787X
University of Southern California · USThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USUniversity of Arizona · USRice University · USUniversity of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa · USUniversity of Houston · USViocare (United States) · US

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Scott Kopetz · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
University of Hawaii Cancer Center CCSGP30CA071789 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII AT MANOA · PI Xin Chen · 1996 to 2026
$56.2M
CANCER PREVENTION EDUCAT--STUDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCESR25CA056452 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Shine Chang · 1992 to 2026
$6.9M
Maternal Stress and Children's Obesity RiskR01HL119255 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI DUNTON, GENEVIEVE FRIDLUND · 2013 to 2017
$4.0M
Study of biomarkers in ovarian cancer: modulation by activity & diet interventionR01CA186700 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA · PI BASEN-ENGQUIST, KAREN M, THOMSON, CYNTHIA A. · 2015 to 2019
$3.4M
Using hunger training to enhance weight loss and modulate cancer-related biomarkers in women at high risk for breast cancer: a pilot studyR21CA215415 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI BASEN-ENGQUIST, KAREN M, SCHEMBRE, SUSAN · 2017 to 2018
$383k
Sleep variability, diet, and obesity risk in childrenF31HL137346 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI O'CONNOR, SYDNEY GRACE · 2017 to 2019
$92k
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672NCI NIH HHS P30 CA071789NCI NIH HHS R01 CA186700NCI NIH HHS R21 CA215415NCI NIH HHS R25 CA056452NHLBI NIH HHS F31 HL137346NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL119255
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNew methods for assessing diet in research are being developed to address the limitations of traditional dietary assessment methods. Mobile device-assisted ecological momentary diet assessment (mEMDA) is a new dietary assessment method that has not yet been optimized and has the potential to minimize recall biases and participant burden while maximizing ecological validity. There have been limited efforts to characterize the use of mEMDA in behavioral research settings.

objectiveThe aims of this study were to summarize mEMDA protocols used in research to date, to characterize key aspects of these assessment approaches, and to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of mEMDA compared with the traditional dietary assessment methods as well as implications for future mEMDA research.

methodsStudies that used mobile devices and described mEMDA protocols to assess dietary intake were included. Data were extracted according to Preferred Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Cochrane guidelines and then synthesized narratively.

resultsThe review included 20 studies with unique mEMDA protocols. Of these, 50% (10/20) used participant-initiated reports of intake at eating events (event-contingent mEMDA), and 50% (10/20) used researcher-initiated prompts requesting that participants report recent dietary intake (signal-contingent mEMDA). A majority of the study protocols (60%, 12/20) enabled participants to use mobile phones to report dietary data. Event-contingent mEMDA protocols most commonly assessed diet in real time, used dietary records for data collection (60%, 6/10), and provided estimates of energy and nutrient intake (60%, 6/10). All signal-contingent mEMDA protocols used a near real-time recall approach with unannounced (ie, random) abbreviated diet surveys. Most signal-contingent protocols (70%, 7/10) assessed the frequency with which (targeted) foods or food groups were consumed. Relatively few (30%, 6/20) studies compared mEMDA with the traditional dietary assessment methods.

conclusionsThis review demonstrates that mEMDA has the potential to reduce participant burden and recall bias, thus advancing the field beyond current dietary assessment methods while maximizing ecological validity.

Indexed as

diet recordsdiet surveysecological momentary assessmentmobile appsmobile phone

Identifiers

PMID30459148
PMCPMC6280032
OpenAlexW2897199798

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.