Popular Nutrition-Related Mobile Apps: An Agreement Assessment Against a UK Reference Method

Abstract

Background Nutrition-related apps are commonly used to provide information about the user’s dietary intake, but limited research has been performed to assess how well their outputs agree with those from standard methods. Objective The objective of our study was to evaluate the level of agreement of popular nutrition-related apps for the assessment of energy and available macronutrients and micronutrients against a UK reference method. Methods We compared dietary analysis of 24-hour weighed food records (n=20) between 5 nutrition-related apps (Samsung Health, MyFitnessPal, FatSecret, Noom Coach, and Lose It!) and Dietplan6 (reference method), using app versions available in the United Kingdom. We compared estimates of energy, macronutrients (carbohydrate, protein, fat, saturated fat, and fiber), and micronutrients (sodium, calcium, iron, vitamin A, and vitamin C) using paired t tests and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, correlation coefficients, and Bland-Altman plots. We obtained 24-hour weighed food records from 20 participants (15 female, 5 male participants; mean age 36.3 years; mean body mass index 22.9 kg/m 2 ) from previous controlled studies conducted at the Hugh Sinclair Unit of Human Nutrition, University of Reading, Reading, UK. Participants had recorded their food consumption over a 24-hour period using standard protocols. Results The difference in estimation of energy and saturated fat intake between Dietplan6 and the diet apps was not significant. Estimates of protein and sodium intake were significantly lower using Lose It! and FatSecret than using Dietplan6. Lose It! also gave significantly lower estimates for other reported outputs (carbohydrate, fat, fiber, and sodium) than did Dietplan6. Samsung Health and MyFitnessPal significantly underestimated calcium, iron, and vitamin C compared with Dietplan6, although there was no significant difference for vitamin A. We observed no other significant differences between Dietplan6 and the apps. Correlation coefficients ranged from r =–.12 for iron (Samsung Health vs Dietplan6) to r =.91 for protein (FatSecret vs Dietplan6). Noom Coach was limited to energy output, but it had a high correlation with Dietplan6 ( r =.91). Samsung Health had the greatest variation of correlation, with energy at r =.79. Bland-Altman analysis revealed potential proportional bias for vitamin A. Conclusions The findings suggest that the apps provide estimates of energy and saturated fat intake comparable with estimates by Dietplan6. With the exception of Lose It!, the apps also provided comparable estimates of carbohydrate, total fat, and fiber. FatSecret and Lose It! tended to underestimate protein and sodium. Estimates of micronutrient intake (calcium, iron, vitamin A, and vitamin C) by 2 apps...

15 Smartphone Apps for Older Adults to Use While in Isolation During the COVID-19 Pandemic

“…59,65 Limitations of MyFitnessPal include unreliable estimation of (micro-) nutrients ingestion and ineffectiveness in patients without goals and willingness to self-monitor calories. [66][67][68][69] Therefore, although MyFitnessPal may be recommended to promote healthy behavior, OAs should not use MyFitnessPal by itself, and work in conjunction with a dietitian if possible. 70…”

Medical Food Assessment Using a Smartphone App With Continuous Glucose Monitoring Sensors: Proof-of-Concept Study

“…Complementing the photos with more precise annotations could also improve estimates. Smartphone apps that rely on drop-down menus provide fair estimates of carbohydrate consumption [ 35 , 36 ] and greatly outperform self-assessment [ 37 ].…”

Underreporting of Dietary Intake: Key Issues for Weight Management Clinicians

“…Results regarding accuracy of this and other apps are also mixed. Validity studies have found that MyFitnessPal underestimates ingestion of nutrients [57,58] or micronutrients [59]. In a study of 43 adults logging dietary intake over a four-day period, Chen and colleagues found that approximately 18% of food items were omitted from the app, primarily energy-dense and nutrient-poor foods [60], casting doubt on the idea that smartphone apps could decrease underreporting.…”