Cited by 62Nutritional Studies and DietSurvey Methodology and NonresponseNutrition, Health and Food Behavior

Traditional methods v. new technologies – dilemmas for dietary assessment in large-scale nutrition surveys and studies: a report following an international panel discussion at the 9th International Conference on Diet and Activity Methods (ICDAM9), Brisbane, 3 September 2015

Open access
Amoutzopoulos, B., Steer, T., Roberts, C., Cade, J. E., Boushey, C. J., Collins, C. E., Trolle, E., Boer, E. J. de +5 more·2018·Journal of Nutritional Science

Abstract

The aim of the present paper is to summarise current and future applications of dietary assessment technologies in nutrition surveys in developed countries. It includes the discussion of key points and highlights of subsequent developments from a panel discussion to address strengths and weaknesses of traditional dietary assessment methods (food records, FFQ, 24 h recalls, diet history with interviewer-assisted data collection) v. new technology-based dietary assessment methods (web-based and mobile device applications). The panel discussion ‘Traditional methods v. new technologies: dilemmas for dietary assessment in population surveys’, was held at the 9th International Conference on Diet and Activity Methods (ICDAM9), Brisbane, September 2015. Despite respondent and researcher burden, traditional methods have been most commonly used in nutrition surveys. However, dietary assessment technologies offer potential advantages including faster data processing and better data quality. This is a fast-moving field and there is evidence of increasing demand for the use of new technologies amongst the general public and researchers. There is a need for research and investment to support efforts being made to facilitate the inclusion of new technologies for rapid, accurate and representative data.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/jns.2018.4

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Cost, participant burden, and misreporting affect the scalability of epidemiologic studies that use traditional paper-based 24-h recalls or food records to capture timing, frequency, and regularity of eating.

    “To this end, factors such as cost, participant burden, and misreporting continue to affect the scalability of the few epidemiologic studies that deploy traditional paper-based 24-h recalls or food records to capture the 3 time dimensions of eating (23).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 51 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [26]Warensjö Lemming E & Lindroos AK (2017) Web-based dietary assessment – experiences from the national dietary surveys in Sweden. Max Rubner Conference 2017, Nutrition Monitoring – Challenges and Developments, 9–11 October 2017, Karlsruhe, Germany, Abstract 12. https://www.mri.bund.de/fileadmin/MRI/Events/MRC/MRI_MRC2017_Abstracts_final_web-c.pdf (accessed March 2018).
  2. [30]Lutien A, De Leeuw E & Hox J (2017) Results of the (new) International Questionnaire on Non-response: response of the LFS and other surveys. International Workshop on Household Survey Nonresponse, Utrecht, the Netherlands, 30 August–1 September 2017. http://www.nonresponse.org/c/554/Keynote_and_special_session_/?preid=556 (accessed March 2018).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Amoutzopoulos, B., Steer, T., Roberts, C., Cade, J. E., Boushey, C. J., Collins, C. E., Trolle, E., Boer, E. J. D., Ziauddeen, N., van Rossum, C., Buurma, E., Coyle, D., & Page, P.
Affiliations
  • MRC Elsie Widdowson Laboratory (GB)
  • NatCen Social Research (GB)
  • University of Leeds (GB)
  • Cancer Center of Hawaii (US)
  • University of Newcastle Australia (AU)
  • Technical University of Denmark (DK)
  • National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (NL)
Corresponding author
Amoutzopoulos, B.
Venue
Journal of Nutritional Science
Published
2018
Volume
7
Pages
e11-e11
ISSN
2048-6790 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2796385874
Cited by
62
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2
FWCI
6.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Nutritional Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • eSpace (Curtin University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Technical University of Denmark, DTU Orbit (Technical University of Denmark, DTU) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Rivm Repository (Netherlands National Institute for Public Health and the Environment) (submittedVersion)
  • NOVA (University of Newcastle Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Rivm (National Institute for Public Health and the Environment) (submittedVersion)
  • NOVA (University of Newcastle Australia) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • University of Cambridge
  • Medical Research Council (U105960384)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
Keywords
dietary assessment, dietary surveys, food diary, food frequency questionnaire, 24-hour dietary recall, web-based dietary assessment, mobile application, respondent burden, data quality

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