ArticlePloS one2025
Validating self-administration as an agile modality for high-frequency diet quality data collection.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital and Technology-Enabled Approaches in Dietary Assessment: Addressing Bias, Error, and Feasibility in Population- and Community-Based Research.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Review
- A Novel Automated Participant-Recorded Dietary Data Collection Method Using Low-Cost Mobile Phones and Interactive Voice Response with Low-Literacy Women: A Validation Study in Rural Uganda.Current developments in nutrition · 2026Article
- Validity of the Diet Quality Questionnaire Compared with Observed Intake for Estimating Population-Level Diet Quality in Rwandan Adults.Current developments in nutrition · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Data collection of diet quality is important to estimate global dietary transitions affecting public health. Mobile-phone based tools can provide a low-cost and rapidly deployable modality to complement enumerator-collected data. This study validated self-administration of the Diet Quality Questionnaire using mobile phones, comparing accuracy against enumerator administration, measuring both against an observed benchmark. Quantitative dietary intake data were gathered from 308 participants in northwest Rwanda, using a weighed food record. Intake data were used to calculated 'observed' responses to the questionnaire, half the participants responding to enumerators, and the other half using a mobile-administered version of the questionnaire. After filtering for low quality data, agreement in observed and reported responses, for all questionnaire questions, were statistically compared. Agreement rates (observed-reported) of self-administered and enumerated responses were high (91% vs 95%, p = 0.05), respectively. Agreement was significantly lower for the mobile-administered modality among older and lower income respondents (by about 5 percentage points), with no significant differences by gender or time of response. Mobile-administration cost approximately USD 0.70 per response, versus the marginal cost of USD 0.79 for the enumerator-administered. Our results confirm self-administered reporting by mobile-phone as a valid, low-cost method for collecting dietary data, with only marginal (yet significant for some subgroups) differences in agreement rates, compared to enumerated data. Data collection by mobile phone represents an agile complement to enumerated collection, administrable in the absence of existing survey platforms; and provides a useful option for high-frequency data collection to monitor dietary dynamics in target sub-populations.
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.