Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35885855›Full record

ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2022

The Use of Mobile-Based Ecological Momentary Assessment (mEMA) Methodology to Assess Dietary Intake, Food Consumption Behaviours and Context in Young People: A Systematic Review.

Brigitte Battaglia, Lydia Lee, Si Si Jia, Stephanie Ruth Partridge, Margaret Allman-Farinelli

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. 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
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

5 authors.

Brigitte BattagliaCharles Perkins Centre, Sydney Nursing School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
Lydia LeeCharles Perkins Centre, Sydney Nursing School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
Si Si JiaEngagement and Co-Design Research Hub, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0352-7970
Stephanie Ruth PartridgeEngagement and Co-Design Research Hub, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5390-3922
Margaret Allman-FarinelliCharles Perkins Centre, Sydney Nursing School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6478-1374

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mobile-based ecological momentary assessment (mEMA) offers a novel method for dietary assessment and may reduce recall bias and participant burden. This review evaluated mEMA methodology and the feasibility, acceptability and validity as a dietary assessment method in young people. Five databases were searched from January 2008 to September 2021 for studies including healthy young people aged 16-30 years and used mEMA for obtaining dietary intake data, food consumption behaviours and/or contextual factors. Data on the method used to administer mEMA, compliance with recording and validation were extracted. A total of 46 articles from 39 independent studies were included, demonstrating a wide variation in mEMA methods. Signal-contingent prompting (timed notification to record throughout the day) was used in 26 studies, 9 used event-contingent (food consumption triggered recordings), while 4 used both. Monitoring periods varied and most studies reported a compliance rate of 80% or more. Two studies found mEMA to be burdensome and six reported mEMA as easy to use. Most studies (31/39) reported using previously validated questions. mEMA appears to be a feasible and acceptable methodology to assess dietary intake and food consumption in near real time.

Indexed as

dietary assessment methodeating behaviourfood consumption behaviourmEMAm-healthmobile ecological momentary assessmentyoung people

Identifiers

PMID35885855
PMCPMC9321045

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.