Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 335

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

New mobile methods for dietary assessment: review of image-assisted and image-based dietary assessment methods

Open access
Boushey, C. J., Spoden, M., Zhu, F. M., Delp, E. J., Kerr, D. A.·2017·Proceedings of the Nutrition Society

Abstract

For nutrition practitioners and researchers, assessing dietary intake of children and adults with a high level of accuracy continues to be a challenge. Developments in mobile technologies have created a role for images in the assessment of dietary intake. The objective of this review was to examine peer-reviewed published papers covering development, evaluation and/or validation of image-assisted or image-based dietary assessment methods from December 2013 to January 2016. Images taken with handheld devices or wearable cameras have been used to assist traditional dietary assessment methods for portion size estimations made by dietitians (image-assisted methods). Image-assisted approaches can supplement either dietary records or 24-h dietary recalls. In recent years, image-based approaches integrating application technology for mobile devices have been developed (image-based methods). Image-based approaches aim at capturing all eating occasions by images as the primary record of dietary intake, and therefore follow the methodology of food records. The present paper reviews several image-assisted and image-based methods, their benefits and challenges; followed by details on an image-based mobile food record. Mobile technology offers a wide range of feasible options for dietary assessment, which are easier to incorporate into daily routines. The presented studies illustrate that image-assisted methods can improve the accuracy of conventional dietary assessment methods by adding eating occasion detail via pictures captured by an individual (dynamic images). All of the studies reduced underreporting with the help of images compared with results with traditional assessment methods. Studies with larger sample sizes are needed to better delineate attributes with regards to age of user, degree of error and cost.

Overview

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/s0029665116002913

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 335

Metadata

Authors
Boushey, C. J., Spoden, M., Zhu, F. M., Delp, E. J., & Kerr, D. A.
Venue
Proceedings of the Nutrition Society
Published
2016-12-12
Volume
76
Issue
3
Pages
283-294
ISSN
  • 0029-6651 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-2719
OpenAlex
W2560828904
Cited by
335
References
5
FWCI
20.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.