An evaluation of portion size estimation aids: precision, ease of use and likelihood of future use

Abstract

Objective: The present study aimed to evaluate the precision, ease of use and likelihood of future use of portion size estimation aids (PSEA). Design: A range of PSEA were used to estimate the serving sizes of a range of commonly eaten foods and rated for ease of use and likelihood of future usage. Setting: For each food, participants selected their preferred PSEA from a range of options including: quantities and measures; reference objects; measuring; and indicators on food packets. These PSEA were used to serve out various foods (e.g. liquid, amorphous, and composite dishes). Ease of use and likelihood of future use were noted. The foods were weighed to determine the precision of each PSEA. Subjects: Males and females aged 18-64 years (n 120). Results: The quantities and measures were the most precise PSEA (lowest range of weights for estimated portion sizes). However, participants preferred household measures (e.g. 200 ml disposable cup) -deemed easy to use (median rating of 5), likely to use again in future (all scored either 4 or 5 on a scale from 1 = 'not very likely' to 5 = 'very likely to use again') and precise (narrow range of weights for estimated portion sizes). The majority indicated they would most likely use the PSEA preparing a meal (94 %), particularly dinner (86 %) in the home (89 %; all P < 0·001) for amorphous grain foods. Conclusions: Household measures may be precise, easy to use and acceptable aids for estimating the appropriate portion size of amorphous grain foods.

Dietary assessment in minority ethnic groups: a systematic review of instruments for portion-size estimation in the United Kingdom

“…The lack of a consistent pattern with regard to the impact of food texture on PSEE performance also confirms previous findings, 15 , 17 , 51 suggesting that estimation accuracy may interact with other uncontrolled factors such as a participant’s experience, level of attention, willingness to cooperate, or education 17 , 51 . A study in British adults in which photos were compared with weighed foods reported less accuracy in estimating French fries, mashed potatoes, and spaghetti than in estimating cornflakes, 92 while a study in Norwegian children 93 found that mashed potatoes and cornflakes, in addition to other shaped or amorphous foods, were the most accurately estimated foods.…”

“…Nevertheless, a wider range of food types needs to be explored with such tools, as performance depended heavily on food texture, and no consistent pattern was seen across studies (ie, some studies favored food picture–based PSEEs for foods with defined shape 18 , 56 and food models for amorphous food, 11 while others showed the opposite 56 ). Household utensils, on the other hand, were the least precise and least accurate in at least 2 studies, 51 , 56 as observed in some Group 1 studies 5 , 32 . While simple instruments may be nonintrusive, quick to complete, and suitable for low-literacy groups or those not speaking the language of the host country, limitations in the validity and reproducibility of such tools need to be considered.…”

“…In addition, more than 75% of the PSEEs described here were applied across various age and sex population groups, but some were tested only in women, children, or first- or second-generation migrants, thus preventing conclusions about their general application. The use of a controlled environment also may have influenced the results, 11 , 15 , 39 , 51 as participants might have been more aware of their portion size than in normal day-to-day situations. Finally, while portion size has been recognized as a growing contributor to variation in intakes in recent years, frequency of consumption continues to be the major cause of variation 95 , 96 .…”

Does the incorporation of portion-control strategies in a behavioral program improve weight loss in a 1-year randomized controlled trial?

“…Most of the research related to such tools has focused on whether they improve the accuracy of portion size estimation 18,48 . One study, however, assessed the usage of portion-control tools and found that household measures were rated as the easiest to use and reported to be the most likely to be used again 19 . The current trial found that household measures were initially the most frequently used tool of the four provided, but after three months their reported use decreased substantially.…”

“…When restricting energy intake, individuals can eat their usual amount of food by consuming larger portions of low-energy-dense foods (vegetables, fruits, lean proteins) while limiting portions of higher-energy-dense foods (high-fat, low-water foods). The use of tools such as food scales and household measures could improve the implementation of such recommendations 18,19 . Surprisingly few studies have examined whether use of portion-control tools is sustained over time and whether they facilitate weight management; however, promising results have been found using plates that indicate appropriate proportions of meal components 20–22 .…”