Cited by 96Nutrition, Health and Food BehaviorNutritional Studies and DietConsumer Attitudes and Food Labeling

Portion size estimation and expectation of accuracy

Hernández, Teresita, Wilder, Lora, Kuehn, Doris, Rubotzky, Kenneth, Moser-Veillon, Phylis, Godwin, Sandria, Thompson, Cindy, Wang, Chunling·2006·Journal of Food Composition and Analysis

Abstract

The accuracy of portion size estimates is critical in dietary assessment. The objectives of this study were to determine the magnitude and direction of error in estimating food amounts using computer-based portion anchors; to compare errors between use of computer- and poster-displayed anchors; and to assess level of accuracy that can reasonably be expected for different food types. A total of 101 subjects estimated amounts of food items (five solid, four amorphous, three liquid) using computer-based portion anchors. Half of the subjects also estimated five of the foods using digital photographs printed onto a poster. Two modes of testing were conducted: real time, in which foods were displayed near the computer or poster, and short-term recall, in which food was consumed and then estimated. Overall error (mean±se) in real time was 4.8%±1.8%; by food type, solid was 8.3%±2.3%, amorphous was -10%±2.7%, and liquid was 19%±5%. However, group mean values could mask true errors. This research showed that even within food type, variables including amount served and its closeness to anchor size affected accuracy of estimates. For each food, amount served correlated inversely with magnitude of error. The findings provide insight into sources of error in portion estimation, and factors to consider in setting reasonable levels of accuracy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jfca.2006.02.010

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hernández, T., Wilder, L., Kuehn, D., Rubotzky, K., Moser-Veillon, P., Godwin, S., Thompson, C., & Wang, C.
Affiliations
  • Health Technomics (United States) (US)
  • Tennessee State University (US)
  • University of Maryland, College Park (US)
Corresponding author
Hernández, Teresita
Venue
Journal of Food Composition and Analysis
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-08
Volume
19
Pages
S14-S21
ISSN
0889-1575 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2084913931
Cited by
96
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 8
FWCI
0.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Food Composition and Analysis (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
Keywords
portion size estimation, dietary assessment, estimation error, food type, liquid foods, short-term recall

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review