TY - JOUR
T1 - Accuracy of energy and nutrient intake estimation versus observed intake using 4 technology-assisted dietary assessment methods
T2 - a randomized crossover feeding study
AU - Whitton, Clare
AU - Collins, Clare E.
AU - Mullan, Barbara A.
AU - Rollo, Megan E.
AU - Dhaliwal, Satvinder S.
AU - Norman, Richard
AU - Boushey, Carol J.
AU - Delp, Edward J.
AU - Zhu, Fengqing
AU - McCaffrey, Tracy A.
AU - Kirkpatrick, Sharon I.
AU - Pollard, Christina M.
AU - Healy, Janelle D.
AU - Hassan, Amira
AU - Garg, Shivangi
AU - Atyeo, Paul
AU - Mukhtar, Syed Aqif
AU - Kerr, Deborah A.
N1 - Funding Information:
\u2612 The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Deborah Kerr reports financial support was provided by Australian Research Council. Clare Whitton reports financial support was provided by Australian Government Department of Education. Deborah Kerr, Carol Boushey, Edward Delp has patent #\u201CDietary Assessment System and Method\u201D, U.S. Patent 8 605 952 B2, December 10, 2013. issued to Deborah Kerr, Carol Boushey, Edward Delp. Deborah Kerr, Carol Boushey, Edward Delp has patent #\u201CDietary Assessment System and Method\u201D, U.S. Patent 8 363 913 B2, January 29, 2013. pending to Deborah Kerr, Carol Boushey, Edward Delp. If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Funding Information:
Intake24 is an open-source web-based dietary assessment research tool based on the 24-hour recall method, primarily designed for self-completion. Intake24 was created by Newcastle University (UK), funded by Food Standards Agency, Scotland. The system is further developed and maintained through a collaboration between Cambridge University, Monash University and Newcastle University (UK).
Funding Information:
The mFR\u2122 app is funded by NIH, NCI (1U01CA130784-01, 1U24CA268228-01); NIH, NIDDK (1R01-DK073711-01A1, 2R56DK073711-04). The term mobile Food Record (mFR) is a registered trademark.
Funding Information:
This study was funded by an Australian Research Council Discovery Project 190101723 entitled \u201CAccuracy and cost-effectiveness of technology-assisted dietary assessment.\u201D ASA24, the Automated Self-Administered (ASA24) Dietary Assessment Tool, version 2016, was developed by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD. ASA24 is a registered trademark of HHS. In collaboration with the National Cancer Institute (NCI), a consortium of Australian researchers adapted ASA24 to the Australian context, led by The Institute for Nutrition and Physical Activity (IPAN) at Deakin University. Intake24 is an open-source web-based dietary assessment research tool based on the 24-h recall method, primarily designed for self-completion. Intake24 was created by Newcastle University (UK), funded by Food Standards, Scotland. The system is further developed and maintained through a collaboration between Cambridge University, Monash University, and Newcastle University (UK). The mobile Food Record app study was funded by NIH-NCI (1U01CA130784-01, 1U24CA268228-01) and NIH-NIDDK (1R01DK073711-01A1, 2R56DK073711-04). The term mobile Food Record (mFR) is a registered trademark. CW and JDH are supported by an Australian Research Training Programme scholarship. CEC is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia Leadership (L3) Research Fellowship (APP2009340). The sponsors had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, and in the decision to publish the results.
Funding Information:
C.W. and J.D.H. are supported by an Australian Research Training Programme scholarship.
Funding Information:
Intake24 is an open-source web-based dietary assessment research tool based on the 24-hour recall method, primarily designed for self-completion. Intake24 was created by Newcastle University (UK), funded by Food Standards Agency, Scotland. The system is further developed and maintained through a collaboration between Cambridge University, Monash University and Newcastle University (UK).The mobile Food Record app\u2122 study was funded by NIH-NCI (1U01CA130784\u201301, 1U24CA268228-01) and NIH-NIDDK (1R01-DK073711\u201301A1, 2R56DK073711\u201304).
Funding Information:
This study was funded by an Australian Research Council Discovery Project 190101723. ASA24, the Automated Self-Administered (ASA24) Dietary Assessment Tool, version (2016), developed by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD. ASA24 is a registered trademark of HHS.
Funding Information:
C.E.C is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia Leadership (L3) Research Fellowship (APP2009340).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Authors
PY - 2024/7
Y1 - 2024/7
N2 - Background: Technology-assisted 24-h dietary recalls (24HRs) have been widely adopted in population nutrition surveillance. Evaluations of 24HRs inform improvements, but direct comparisons of 24HR methods for accuracy in reference to a measure of true intake are rarely undertaken in a single study population. Objectives: To compare the accuracy of energy and nutrient intake estimation of 4 technology-assisted dietary assessment methods relative to true intake across breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Methods: In a controlled feeding study with a crossover design, 152 participants [55% women; mean age 32 y, standard deviation (SD) 11; mean body mass index 26 kg/m2, SD 5] were randomized to 1 of 3 separate feeding days to consume breakfast, lunch, and dinner, with unobtrusive weighing of foods and beverages consumed. Participants undertook a 24HR the following day [Automated Self-Administered Dietary Assessment Tool-Australia (ASA24); Intake24-Australia; mobile Food Record-Trained Analyst (mFR-TA); or Image-Assisted Interviewer-Administered 24-hour recall (IA-24HR)]. When assigned to IA-24HR, participants referred to images captured of their meals using the mobile Food Record (mFR) app. True and estimated energy and nutrient intakes were compared, and differences among methods were assessed using linear mixed models. Results: The mean difference between true and estimated energy intake as a percentage of true intake was 5.4% (95% CI: 0.6, 10.2%) using ASA24, 1.7% (95% CI: −2.9, 6.3%) using Intake24, 1.3% (95% CI: −1.1, 3.8%) using mFR-TA, and 15.0% (95% CI: 11.6, 18.3%) using IA-24HR. The variances of estimated and true energy intakes were statistically significantly different for all methods (P < 0.01) except Intake24 (P = 0.1). Differential accuracy in nutrient estimation was present among the methods. Conclusions: Under controlled conditions, Intake24, ASA24, and mFR-TA estimated average energy and nutrient intakes with reasonable validity, but intake distributions were estimated accurately by Intake24 only (energy and protein). This study may inform considerations regarding instruments of choice in future population surveillance. This trial was registered at Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry as ACTRN12621000209897.
AB - Background: Technology-assisted 24-h dietary recalls (24HRs) have been widely adopted in population nutrition surveillance. Evaluations of 24HRs inform improvements, but direct comparisons of 24HR methods for accuracy in reference to a measure of true intake are rarely undertaken in a single study population. Objectives: To compare the accuracy of energy and nutrient intake estimation of 4 technology-assisted dietary assessment methods relative to true intake across breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Methods: In a controlled feeding study with a crossover design, 152 participants [55% women; mean age 32 y, standard deviation (SD) 11; mean body mass index 26 kg/m2, SD 5] were randomized to 1 of 3 separate feeding days to consume breakfast, lunch, and dinner, with unobtrusive weighing of foods and beverages consumed. Participants undertook a 24HR the following day [Automated Self-Administered Dietary Assessment Tool-Australia (ASA24); Intake24-Australia; mobile Food Record-Trained Analyst (mFR-TA); or Image-Assisted Interviewer-Administered 24-hour recall (IA-24HR)]. When assigned to IA-24HR, participants referred to images captured of their meals using the mobile Food Record (mFR) app. True and estimated energy and nutrient intakes were compared, and differences among methods were assessed using linear mixed models. Results: The mean difference between true and estimated energy intake as a percentage of true intake was 5.4% (95% CI: 0.6, 10.2%) using ASA24, 1.7% (95% CI: −2.9, 6.3%) using Intake24, 1.3% (95% CI: −1.1, 3.8%) using mFR-TA, and 15.0% (95% CI: 11.6, 18.3%) using IA-24HR. The variances of estimated and true energy intakes were statistically significantly different for all methods (P < 0.01) except Intake24 (P = 0.1). Differential accuracy in nutrient estimation was present among the methods. Conclusions: Under controlled conditions, Intake24, ASA24, and mFR-TA estimated average energy and nutrient intakes with reasonable validity, but intake distributions were estimated accurately by Intake24 only (energy and protein). This study may inform considerations regarding instruments of choice in future population surveillance. This trial was registered at Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry as ACTRN12621000209897.
KW - Automated Self-Administered Dietary Assessment Tool
KW - controlled feeding
KW - dietary assessment
KW - dietary measurement error
KW - image-assisted
KW - Intake24
KW - interview-administered dietary recall
KW - mobile food record
KW - mobile technology
KW - validation
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85193938790
U2 - 10.1016/j.ajcnut.2024.04.030
DO - 10.1016/j.ajcnut.2024.04.030
M3 - Article
C2 - 38710447
AN - SCOPUS:85193938790
SN - 0002-9165
VL - 120
SP - 196
EP - 210
JO - The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
JF - The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
IS - 1
ER -