Cited by 99Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsNutrition, Health and Food BehaviorDigital Mental Health Interventions

Development and feasibility testing of a smart phone based attentive eating intervention

Open access
Robinson, Eric, Higgs, Suzanne, Daley, Amanda J, Jolly, Kate, Lycett, Deborah, Lewis, Amanda, Aveyard, Paul·2013·BMC Public Health

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Attentive eating means eating devoid of distraction and increasing awareness and memory for food being consumed. Encouraging individuals to eat more attentively could help reduce calorie intake, as a strong evidence base suggests that memory and awareness of food being consumed substantially influence energy intake. METHODS: The development and feasibility testing of a smartphone based attentive eating intervention is reported. Informed by models of behavioral change, a smartphone application was developed. Feasibility was tested in twelve overweight and obese volunteers, sampled from university staff. Participants used the application during a four week trial and semi-structured interviews were conducted to assess acceptability and to identify barriers to usage. We also recorded adherence by downloading application usage data from participants' phones at the end of the trial. RESULTS: Adherence data indicated that participants used the application regularly. Participants also felt the application was easy to use and lost weight during the trial. Thematic analysis indicated that participants felt that the application raised their awareness of what they were eating. Analysis also indicated barriers to using a smartphone application to change dietary behavior. CONCLUSIONS: An attentive eating based intervention using smartphone technology is feasible and testing of its effectiveness for dietary change and weight loss is warranted.

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 · 10.1186/1471-2458-13-639

Cites

22 of 22 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?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Robinson, E., Higgs, S., Daley, A. J., Jolly, K., Lycett, D., Lewis, A., & Aveyard, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Liverpool (GB)
  • University of Birmingham (GB)
  • Coventry University (GB)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Robinson, Eric
Venue
BMC Public Health
Published
2013-07-09
Volume
13
Issue
1
Pages
639-639
ISSN
1471-2458 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1992755183
Cited by
99
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 6
FWCI
17.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (publishedVersion)
  • Coventry University Open Collections (Coventry university) (submittedVersion)
  • Pure (Coventry University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • The Open Collections (Coventry University) (submittedVersion)
  • BMC Public Health
Funders
  • United Kingdom Clinical Research Collaboration
  • Cancer Research UK
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (SPCR-018, SPCR-001)
  • British Heart Foundation
  • Medical Research Council (MR/K023195/1, MR/K00414X/1)
  • Economic and Social Research Council (ES/G007489/1)
  • NIHR School for Primary Care Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
mobile application, dietary behavior change, overweight, obesity, weight loss, dietary behavior, food awareness, energy intake, technology adoption barriers, intervention feasibility, acceptability
MeSH terms
Adult, Energy Intake, Feasibility Studies, Feeding Behavior, Female, United Kingdom, Health Promotion, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Risk Reduction Behavior, Cell Phone, Weight Reduction Programs

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