MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322752273 · doi:10.2196/35858

Mobile Apps for Dietary and Food Timing Assessment: Evaluation for Use in Clinical Research

2023· article· en· W4322752273 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Siena Gioia, Irma Vlasac, Demsina Babazadeh, Noah L Fryou, Elizabeth Do, Jessica Love, Rebecca Robbins, Hassan S. Dashti, Jacqueline M. Lane

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of General Medical SciencesHarvard CatalystNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteMassachusetts General Hospital
KeywordsUsabilityMobile appsApp storeComputer scienceInternet privacyWorld Wide WebMedicineHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Over the last decade, health mobile apps have become an increasingly popular tool used by clinicians and researchers to track food consumption and exercise. However, many consumer apps lack the technological features for facilitating the capture of critical food timing details. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to introduce users to 11 apps from US app stores that recorded both dietary intake and food timing to establish which one would be the most appropriate for clinical research. METHODS: To determine a viable app that recorded both dietary intake and food timing for use in a food timing-related clinical study, we evaluated the time stamp data, usability, privacy policies, the accuracy of nutrient estimates, and general features of 11 mobile apps for dietary assessment that were available on US app stores. The following apps were selected using a keyword search of related terms and reviewed: text entry apps-Cronometer, DiaryNutrition, DietDiary, FoodDiary, Macros, and MyPlate; image entry apps-FoodView and MealLogger; and text plus image entry apps-Bitesnap, myCircadianClock, and MyFitnessPal. RESULTS: Our primary goal was to identify apps that recorded food time stamps, which 8 (73%) of the 11 reviewed apps did. Of the 11 apps, only 4 (36%) allowed users to edit the time stamps. Next, we sought to evaluate the usability of the apps using the System Usability Scale across 2 days, and 82% (9/11) of the apps received favorable scores for usability. To enable use in research and clinical settings, the privacy policies of each app were systematically reviewed using common criteria, with 1 (9%) Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant app (Cronometer). Furthermore, protected health information was collected by 9 (82%) of the 11 apps. Finally, to assess the accuracy of the nutrient estimates generated by these apps, we selected 4 sample food items and a 3-day dietary record to input into each app. The caloric and macronutrient estimates of the apps were compared with the nutrient estimates provided by a registered dietitian using the Nutrition Data System for Research database. In terms of the 3-day food record, the apps were found to consistently underestimate daily calories and macronutrients compared with the Nutrition Data System for Research output. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we found that the Bitesnap app provided flexible dietary and food timing functionality capable of being used in research and clinical settings, whereas most other apps lacked in the necessary food timing functionality or user privacy.

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)0.061
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.591
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0610.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.700
GPT teacher head0.720
Teacher spread0.020 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations24
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207