MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2298228937 · doi:10.2196/mhealth.5219

“Smart” RCTs: Development of a Smartphone App for Fully Automated Nutrition-Labeling Intervention Trials

2016· article· en· W2298228937 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ekaterina Volkova, Nicole Li, Elizabeth Dunford, Helen Eyles, Michelle Crino, Jo Michie, Cliona Ní Mhurchú

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicConsumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHealth Research Council of New ZealandEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentMedical Research Council
KeywordsSmartphone appSmartphone applicationIntervention (counseling)mHealthMobile appsRandomized controlled trialMedicineComputer sciencePsychological interventionMultimediaInternet privacyWorld Wide WebSurgeryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is substantial interest in the effects of nutrition labels on consumer food-purchasing behavior. However, conducting randomized controlled trials on the impact of nutrition labels in the real world presents a significant challenge. OBJECTIVE: The Food Label Trial (FLT) smartphone app was developed to enable conducting fully automated trials, delivering intervention remotely, and collecting individual-level data on food purchases for two nutrition-labeling randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in New Zealand and Australia. METHODS: Two versions of the smartphone app were developed: one for a 5-arm trial (Australian) and the other for a 3-arm trial (New Zealand). The RCT protocols guided requirements for app functionality, that is, obtaining informed consent, two-stage eligibility check, questionnaire administration, randomization, intervention delivery, and outcome assessment. Intervention delivery (nutrition labels) and outcome data collection (individual shopping data) used the smartphone camera technology, where a barcode scanner was used to identify a packaged food and link it with its corresponding match in a food composition database. Scanned products were either recorded in an electronic list (data collection mode) or allocated a nutrition label on screen if matched successfully with an existing product in the database (intervention delivery mode). All recorded data were transmitted to the RCT database hosted on a server. RESULTS: In total approximately 4000 users have downloaded the FLT app to date; 606 (Australia) and 1470 (New Zealand) users met the eligibility criteria and were randomized. Individual shopping data collected by participants currently comprise more than 96,000 (Australia) and 229,000 (New Zealand) packaged food and beverage products. CONCLUSIONS: The FLT app is one of the first smartphone apps to enable conducting fully automated RCTs. Preliminary app usage statistics demonstrate large potential of such technology, both for intervention delivery and data collection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12614000964617. New Zealand trial: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12614000644662.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.103
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicConsumer Attitudes and Food LabelingFrench-language works237,207