Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33439139›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2021

The Human Factor in Automated Image-Based Nutrition Apps: Analysis of Common Mistakes Using the goFOOD Lite App.

Maria F Vasiloglou, Klazine van der Horst, Thomai Stathopoulou, Michael P Jaeggi, Giulia S Tedde, Ya Lu, Stavroula Mougiakakou

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Multimedia Data-Based Mobile Applications for Dietary Assessment.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2023
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Maria F Vasiloglou *ARTORG Center for Biomedical Engineering Research, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-2013-2858
Klazine van der Horst *Department of Health Professions, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-7265-428X
Thomai StathopoulouARTORG Center for Biomedical Engineering Research, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-2847-9474
Michael P JaeggiDepartment of Health Professions, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-1883-0427
Giulia S TeddeDepartment of Health Professions, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-8190-7071
Ya LuARTORG Center for Biomedical Engineering Research, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-0795-4483
Stavroula MougiakakouARTORG Center for Biomedical Engineering Research, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-6355-9982
University of Bern · CHBern University of Applied Sciences · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTechnological advancements have enabled nutrient estimation by smartphone apps such as goFOOD. This is an artificial intelligence-based smartphone system, which uses food images or video captured by the user as input and then translates these into estimates of nutrient content. The quality of the data is highly dependent on the images the user records. This can lead to a major loss of data and impaired quality. Instead of removing these data from the study, in-depth analysis is needed to explore common mistakes and to use them for further improvement of automated apps for nutrition assessment.

objectiveThe aim of this study is to analyze common mistakes made by participants using the goFOOD Lite app, a version of goFOOD, which was designed for food-logging, but without providing results to the users, to improve both the instructions provided and the automated functionalities of the app.

methodsThe 48 study participants were given face-to-face instructions for goFOOD Lite and were asked to record 2 pictures (1 recording) before and 2 pictures (1 recording) after the daily consumption of each food or beverage, using a reference card as a fiducial marker. All pictures that were discarded for processing due to mistakes were analyzed to record the main mistakes made by users.

resultsOf the 468 recordings of nonpackaged food items captured by the app, 60 (12.8%) had to be discarded due to errors in the capturing procedure. The principal problems were as follows: wrong fiducial marker or improper marker use (19 recordings), plate issues such as a noncompatible or nonvisible plate (8 recordings), a combination of various issues (17 recordings), and other reasons such as obstacles (hand) in front of the camera or matching recording pairs (16 recordings).

conclusionsNo other study has focused on the principal problems in the use of automatic apps for assessing nutritional intake. This study shows that it is important to provide study participants with detailed instructions if high-quality data are to be obtained. Future developments could focus on making it easier to recognize food on various plates from its color or shape and on exploring alternatives to using fiducial markers. It is also essential for future studies to understand the training needed by the participants as well as to enhance the app's user-friendliness and to develop automatic image checks based on participant feedback.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsArtificial IntelligenceHumansNutritional StatusNutrition AssessmentSmartphoneappsdietary assessmenthuman mistakesmHealthmobile phonesmartphone

Identifiers

PMID33439139
PMCPMC7840289
OpenAlexW3118891363

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.