Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38335009›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2024

A Smartphone Food Record App Developed for the Dutch National Food Consumption Survey: Relative Validity Study.

Marga Ocké, Ceciel Simone Dinnissen, Coline van den Bogaard, Marja Beukers, José Drijvers, Eline Sanderman-Nawijn, Caroline van Rossum, Ido Toxopeus

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Marga Ocké *National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1299-6135
Ceciel Simone Dinnissen *National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5404-1834
Coline van den BogaardNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0006-8391-1329
Marja BeukersNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0005-1509-5051
José DrijversNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0008-2109-3345
Eline Sanderman-NawijnNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0003-1666-9403
Caroline van RossumNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8502-9894
Ido ToxopeusNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0005-2737-2837

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the Dutch National Food Consumption Survey, dietary intake has been assessed since 2003 through 24-hour dietary recalls using the GloboDiet software. A new self-administered smartphone food record app called DitEetIk! was developed for potential use in future surveys.

objectiveThis study aims to evaluate the data collected using the DitEetIk! app and its relative validity for food group, energy, and nutrient intake compared with the previous dietary assessment method (GloboDiet 24-hour dietary recalls).

methodsA total of 300 participants aged 18 to 79 years were recruited from a consumer panel. Participants were asked to keep a record of their consumption using the DitEetIk! app on 3 nonconsecutive days. Trained dietitians conducted a 24-hour dietary recall interview by telephone using the GloboDiet software (International Agency for Research on Cancer) regarding 1 of 3 DitEetIk! recording days. Nutrient intake was calculated using the NEVO database (version 2021/7.0). Relative validity was studied by comparing data from GloboDiet 24-hour dietary recalls and the DitEetIk app for the same day. Participants with implausible records, defined as days with energy intake of <0.6 or >3.0 basal metabolic rate, were excluded from the analyses. For 19 food groups and 29 nutrients, differences in median intake were assessed using the Wilcoxon signed rank test, and Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated. Bland-Altman plots with mean differences and 95% limits of agreement were created for energy intake and the contribution to energy intake from fat, carbohydrates, and protein.

resultsA total of 227 participants completed a combination of a DitEetIk! app recording day and a 24-hour dietary recall interview for the same day. Of this group, 211 participants (n=104, 49.3% men and n=107, 50.7% women) had plausible recording days. Of all recorded food items, 12.8% (114/894) were entered via food barcode scanning, and 18.9% (169/894) were searched at the brand level. For 31% (5/16) of the food groups, the median intake assessed using the DitEetIk! app was >10% lower than that assessed using 24-hour dietary recalls; this was the case for fruit (P=.005), added fats (P=.001), milk and milk products (P=.02), cereal products (P=.01), and sauces (P<.001). This was also the case for 14% (4/29) of the nutrients (all P<.001). Regarding mean intake, differences were generally smaller. Regarding energy intake, the mean difference and 95% limits of agreement were 14 kcal (-1096 to 1124). Spearman correlation coefficients between intake assessed using the DitEetIk! app and 24-hour dietary recalls ranged from 0.48 to 0.88 (median 0.78) for food groups and from 0.58 to 0.90 (median 0.72) for nutrients.

conclusionsCompared with GloboDiet 24-hour dietary recalls, the DitEetIk! app assessed similar mean energy intake levels but somewhat lower median intake levels for several food groups and nutrients.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsDietEnergy IntakeFemaleHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsSmartphone24-hour dietary recallappdietdietary intakefoodfood consumptionmobile appmobile phonenational food consumption surveysnutrientsrelative validitysmartphonesmartphone food recordsurvey

Identifiers

PMID38335009
PMCPMC10891498

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.