Application of Artificial Intelligence Technologies as an Intervention for Promoting Healthy Eating and Nutrition in Older Adults: A Systematic Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: The aging population faces a multitude of health challenges, particularly when it comes to maintaining proper nutrition. Age-related physiological changes, such as decreased metabolism, diminished taste perception, and difficulty in chewing, can lead to insufficient nutrient intake, ultimately resulting in malnutrition. It is crucial to address these issues to promote not only physical health but also overall well-being. In this modern era, artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, including robots and machine learning algorithms, are being increasingly harnessed to encourage healthy eating habits among older adults. This is critical to support healthy aging and mitigate diet-related chronic diseases. However, little or no synthesis has established their effectiveness in delivering personalized, scalable, and adaptive interventions for older adults. This systematic review considers the state-of-the-art application of AI-based interventions aimed at improving dietary behaviors and nutritional outcomes in older adults. Methods: Following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines and a registered PROSPERO protocol (ID: CRD420241045268), we systematically analyzed 30 studies we collected from five databases, published between 2015 and 2025 based on different AI techniques, including machine learning, natural language processing, and recommender systems. We synthesized data collected from these studies to examine the intervention types, outcomes, and methodological approaches. Results: Findings from our review highlight the potential of AI-based interventions to promote engagement among older adults and improve adherence to healthy eating guidelines. Additionally, we found some challenges related to ethical concerns such as privacy and transparency, and limited evidence of their long-term effectiveness. Conclusions: AI-based interventions offer significant promise in promoting healthy eating among older adults through personalized, adaptive, and scalable interventions. Yet, current evidence is constrained by some methodological limitations and ethical concerns, which calls for future research to design inclusive, evidence-based AI interventions that address the unique physiological, psychological, and social needs of older adults.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".