ArticleScientific reports2019
Statistical models for meal-level estimation of mass and energy intake using features derived from video observation and a chewing sensor.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence in primary ovarian insufficiency management: opportunities and challenges.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Review
- Energy intake estimation using a novel wearable sensor and food images in a laboratory (pseudo-free-living) meal setting: quantification and contribution of sources of error.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2022Article
- FOODCAM: A Novel Structured Light-Stereo Imaging System for Food Portion Size Estimation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Detection of Food Intake Sensor's Wear Compliance in Free-Living.IEEE sensors journal · 2021Article
- A Dual-Padded, Protrusion-Incorporated, Ring-Type Sensor for the Measurement of Food Mass and Intake.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Automatic Count of Bites and Chews From Videos of Eating Episodes.IEEE access : practical innovations, open solutions · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accurate and objective assessment of energy intake remains an ongoing problem. We used features derived from annotated video observation and a chewing sensor to predict mass and energy intake during a meal without participant self-report. 30 participants each consumed 4 different meals in a laboratory setting and wore a chewing sensor while being videotaped. Subject-independent models were derived from bite, chew, and swallow features obtained from either video observation or information extracted from the chewing sensor. With multiple regression analysis, a forward selection procedure was used to choose the best model. The best estimates of meal mass and energy intake had (mean ± standard deviation) absolute percentage errors of 25.2% ± 18.9% and 30.1% ± 33.8%, respectively, and mean ± standard deviation estimation errors of -17.7 ± 226.9 g and -6.1 ± 273.8 kcal using features derived from both video observations and sensor data. Both video annotation and sensor-derived features may be utilized to objectively quantify energy intake.
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.