ArticleCurrent developments in nutrition2023
Validity of an Artificial Intelligence-Based Application to Identify Foods and Estimate Energy Intake Among Adults: A Pilot Study.
Article in Current developments in nutrition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05343585 (Testing the Validity of an Artificial Intelligence-based Program to Identify Foods and Estimate Food Portion Size Among Adults, a Pilot Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 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.
Testing the Validity of an Artificial Intelligence-based Program to Identify Foods and Estimate Food Portion Size Among Adults, a Pilot Study
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validity of the PortionSize and MyFitnessPal Smartphone Applications for Estimating Dietary Intake: A Randomized Crossover Clinical Trial.The Journal of nutrition · 2025Trial
- Integration of the PortionSize Ed App into SNAP-Ed for Improving Diet Quality Among Adolescents in Hawaii: A Randomized Pilot Study.Nutrients · 2025Trial
- Evaluating function availability and user satisfaction with nutrition apps: user-generated content analysis and text mining study.Nutrition journal · 2026Article
- Article
- Validity of the PortionSize App for Assessing Children's Dietary Intake: Results From a Pilot Study Conducted in Controlled and Free-Living Settings.Pediatric obesity · 2026Article
- The Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to Support Dietetic Practice Across Primary Care: A Scoping Review of the Literature.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Article
- Investigation and Assessment of AI's Role in Nutrition-An Updated Narrative Review of the Evidence.Nutrients · 2025Review
- Evaluating the Validity of the PortionSize Smartphone Application for Estimating Dietary Intake in Free-Living Conditions: A Pilot Study.Journal of nutrition education and behavior · 2024Article
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
Background: The commercial application Openfit allows for automatic identification and quantification of food intake through short video capture without a physical reference marker. There are no known peer-reviewed publications on the validity of this Nutrition Artificial Intelligence (AI). Objectives: To test the validity of Openfit to identify food automatically and semiautomatically (with user correction), test the validity of Openfit at quantifying energy intake (kcal) automatically and semiautomatically, and assess satisfaction and usability of Openfit. Methods: During a laboratory-based visit, adults (7 male and 17 female), used Openfit to automatically and semiautomatically record provided meals, which were covertly weighed. Foods logged were identified as an "exact match," "far match," or an "intrusion" using Food and Nutrient Database for Dietary Studies (FNDDS) codes. Descriptive data were stratified by meal, food item, and FNDDS group, and presented with or without beverages. Bland-Altman analyses assessed errors over levels of energy intake. Participants completed a User Satisfaction Survey (USS) and the Computer Systems Usability Questionnaire (CSUQ). Open-ended questions were assessed with qualitative methods. Results: Exact matches, far matches, and intrusions were 46%, 41%, and 13% for automated identification, and 87%, 23%, and 0% for semiautomated identification, respectively. Error for automated and semiautomated energy estimates were 43% and 33% with beverages, and 16% and 42% without beverages. Bland-Altman analyses indicated larger error for higher energy meals. Overall mean scores were 2.4 for the CSUQ and subscale means scores ranged from 4.1 to 5.5. for the USS. Participants recommended improvements to Openfit's Nutrition AI, manual estimation, and overall app. Conclusion: Openfit worked relatively well for automatically and semiautomatically identifying foods. Error in automated energy estimates was relatively high; however, after excluding beverages, error was relatively low (16%). For semiautomated energy estimates, error was comparable to previous studies. Improvements to the Nutrition AI, manual estimation and overall application may increase Openfit's usability and validity.This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT05343585.
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.