ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2026
Development and validation of a photographic food atlas for portion size estimation in Singapore.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accurate portion size estimation is essential for dietary assessment, yet existing food atlases have limited applicability in Singapore due to its multi-ethnic culinary heritage and unique dietary patterns. This study describes the development and validation of the first comprehensive photographic food atlas designed specifically for Singapore. Method: The atlas was developed using two primary data sources, the 2021 Health Promotion Board Energy and Nutrient Composition of Food database and 24-h dietary recall survey from Singapore's 1st Total Diet Study, to ensure representativeness of commonly consumed foods. Following systematic exclusion criteria, 298 atlas entries were included, representing foods in specific forms or presentations. Of these, 67 entries were series photographs and 231 entries were guide photographs. Validation involved 41 adult participants, recruited through convenience sampling from the national reference laboratory for food science. Participants evaluated 14 entries presented as photo series by selecting the images that best matched corresponding pre-weighed food portions, with two different portions tested per entry. Accuracy was assessed using mean differences, standard deviations, quadratic weighted kappa coefficients, and Spearman coefficients between selected and actual photograph numbers. Additional usability evaluation and participant feedback were also collected. Results: Of the 14 entries tested, 11 (78.6%) met the predefined validation criteria (mean difference < |0.3| and standard deviation < 1). Three entries (beef, peanut, and fish) showed underestimation. Quadratic weighted kappa coefficients ranged from 0.23 to 0.96, while Spearman coefficients ranged from 0.44 to 0.96. Most entries demonstrated good agreement and strong rank-order association. The proportion of correct responses decreased as portion size increased (96.7% for small portions vs. 42.4% for extra-large portions). Most participants rated the atlas favourably for representativeness (76%), portion size appropriateness (73%), and confidence in using the atlas for portion size estimation (71%). Conclusion: This first comprehensive photographic food atlas for Singapore comprises 298 entries of commonly consumed foods. Preliminary validation of 14 selected series entries demonstrated satisfactory accuracy, identifying areas for future refinement, particularly regarding presentation methods for certain entries. Overall, the study demonstrates that the atlas can be useful as a practical, localised tool to support dietary assessment of relevant foods in research and policy.
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.