2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.clnu.2020.08.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Validity of image-based dietary assessment methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
18
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
1
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Despite the fact that most technology-based dietary assessment studies employed dieticians/nutritionists to perform IBDAs [ 19 ], little research has explored how dieticians develop their “tele-dietetic” knowledge, or how accurate their IBDA skills are. Our study showed that after repeated training, more than half (59%) of junior students were able to estimate calories within ±20%, and most importantly, that the accuracy of those who were the poorest performers improved.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Despite the fact that most technology-based dietary assessment studies employed dieticians/nutritionists to perform IBDAs [ 19 ], little research has explored how dieticians develop their “tele-dietetic” knowledge, or how accurate their IBDA skills are. Our study showed that after repeated training, more than half (59%) of junior students were able to estimate calories within ±20%, and most importantly, that the accuracy of those who were the poorest performers improved.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The IBDA method has been employed to measure intake levels of energy and nutrients in children [ 14 , 15 ], adults [ 16 , 17 ], and the elderly [ 18 ]. A recent meta-analysis and systematic review of the validity of IBDAs showed no statistical difference in energy or macronutrient estimates between IBDA and traditional methods (e.g., WFRs and 24-HDRs); however, IBDAs greatly underestimated energy intake (EI) (−448 kcal) when compared to double-labeled water (DLW), a gold standard method for EI assessments [ 19 ]. Those authors concluded that, like traditional methods, image-based methods have serious measurement errors, and more studies are needed to overcome these problems [ 19 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Thereafter, the image data are analyzed to specify the foods, to estimate portion sizes, and to count the dietary intake. Recent studies suggested that image-based methods could provide more accurate dietary data compared with traditional methods [15]; however, their superiority has not been demonstrated [16]. Image-based dietary records have been found to be feasible and valid dietary assessment methods and comparable to the traditional methods in adults [16][17][18][19][20][21].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Traditional methods, such as self-reported 24-hour dietary recall, have significantly underreported energy intake when compared with 7-day food weigh records [ 34 ]. A systematic review and meta-analysis study found that image-based dietary assessments underestimated energy intake by 20% (range 0%-37%) when compared with the doubly labeled water method; however, the study showed no significant difference in energy intakes estimated via traditional methods (such as 24-hour dietary recall) and the RFPM [ 35 ]. We observed in this pilot study that the CI for the mean difference in energy intake estimations between the two methods—the PortionSize app and weigh back—crossed 0 (Table S2 in Multimedia Appendix 1 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%