ArticlePloS one2025
Validation and evaluation of a tablet-based dietary record app for adults aged 70 and above.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed at validating the dietary recording functionality of the NuMob-e-App, developed for adults aged 70 and above, against the 24-hour dietary recall reference standard.
methods104 independently living adults (mean age 75.8 ± 4.1 years; 58% female) from northwest Germany participated. They recorded their dietary intake on three consecutive days using the App. In parallel, we conducted a structured 24-hour dietary recall via telephone. Nutritional intake was analysed for energy, macronutrients, and food groups defined by the German Nutrition Society. Data were analysed for equivalence using Two One-Sided Tests (TOST), agreement using Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC), and systematic differences using Bland-Altman plots.
resultsEquivalence could be shown in 20 of the 44 compared variables, ICC variated between 0.677 to 0.951 for the four macronutrients and between 0.714 and 0.968 for the seven food groups. The Bland-Altman plots showed tendency to underestimation by the app in most variables and relatively narrow limits of agreement.
conclusionsThe NuMob-e-App demonstrated good relative validity for assessing energy, carbohydrate, and protein intake, as well as selected food groups in older adults. While equivalence was not achieved across all 44 variables, agreement was particularly strong for protein and beverages. A general tendency toward intake underestimation by the app was observed. These findings support the app's potential for use in preventive dietary self-monitoring among seniors.
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.