MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4403541238 · doi:10.2196/63823

Evaluating User Experiences and Preferred Features of a Web-Based 24-Hour Dietary Assessment Tool: Usability Study

2024· article· en· W4403541238 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Berit Follong, Caitlin Haliburton, Sally Mackay, Maria Maiquez, Jacqueline Grey, Cliona Ní Mhurchú

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilNewcastle University
KeywordsUsabilityRecallPortion sizeComputer scienceQualitative propertyWorld Wide WebPsychologyHuman–computer interactionFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Intake24, a web-based 24-hour dietary recall tool developed in the United Kingdom, was adapted for use in New Zealand (Intake24-NZ) through the addition of a New Zealand food list, portion size images, and food composition database. Owing to the customizations made, a thorough evaluation of the tool's usability was required. Detailed qualitative usability studies are well suited to investigate any challenges encountered while completing a web-based 24-hour recall and provide meaningful data to inform enhancements to the tool. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the usability of Intake24-NZ and identify improvements to enhance both the user experience and the quality of dietary intake data collected. METHODS: We used a mixed methods approach comprising two components: (1) completion of a single 24-hour dietary recall using Intake24-NZ with both screen observation recordings and collation of verbal participant feedback on their experience and (2) a survey. RESULTS: A total of 37 participants aged ≥11 years self-completed the dietary recall and usability survey (men and boys: 14/37, 38% and women and girls: 23/37, 62%; Māori: 10/37, 27% and non-Māori: 27/37, 73%). Although most (31/37, 84%) reported that Intake24-NZ was easy to use and navigate, data from the recorded observations and usability survey revealed challenges related to the correct use of search terms, search results obtained (eg, type and order of foods displayed), portion size estimation, and associated food prompts (eg, did you add milk to your tea?). CONCLUSIONS: This comprehensive usability study identified challenges experienced by users in completing a dietary recall in Intake24-NZ. The results informed a series of improvements to enhance user experience and the quality of dietary data collected with Intake24-NZ, including adding new foods to the food list, optimizing the search function and ordering of search results, creating new portion size images, and providing clearer instructions to the users.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.185
GPT teacher head0.525
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicNutritional Studies and Diet→French-language works237,207→