Cargando…
Preference, Expected Burden, and Willingness to Use Digital and Traditional Methods to Assess Food and Alcohol Intake
We conducted an online survey to examine the preference, expected burden, and willingness of people to use four different methods of assessing food and alcohol intake such as food/drink record, 24-h recall, Remote Food Photography Method© (RFPM, via SmartIntake(®) app), and a novel app (PortionSize(...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8539386/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34684341 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu13103340 |
_version_ | 1784588734487855104 |
---|---|
author | Höchsmann, Christoph Fearnbach, Nicole Dorling, James L. Fazzino, Tera L. Myers, Candice A. Apolzan, John W. Martin, Corby K. |
author_facet | Höchsmann, Christoph Fearnbach, Nicole Dorling, James L. Fazzino, Tera L. Myers, Candice A. Apolzan, John W. Martin, Corby K. |
author_sort | Höchsmann, Christoph |
collection | PubMed |
description | We conducted an online survey to examine the preference, expected burden, and willingness of people to use four different methods of assessing food and alcohol intake such as food/drink record, 24-h recall, Remote Food Photography Method© (RFPM, via SmartIntake(®) app), and a novel app (PortionSize(®)) that allows the in-app portion size estimation of foods/drinks by the user. For food (N = 1959) and alcohol (N = 466) intake assessment, 67.3% and 63.3%, respectively, preferred the RFPM/SmartIntake(®), 51.9% and 53.4% preferred PortionSize(®), 48.0% and 49.3% the food records, and 32.9% and 33.9% the 24-h recalls (difference in preference across all methods was p < 0.001 for food and alcohol intake). Ratings of burden and preference of methods were virtually superimposable, and we found strong correlations between high preference and low expected burden for all methods (all ρ ≥ 0.82; all p < 0.001). Willingness (mean (SD)) to use the RFPM/SmartIntake(®) (food: 6.6 (2.0); alcohol: 6.4 (2.4)) was greater than PortionSize(®) (food: 6.0 (2.2); alcohol: 6.0 (2.4); all p < 0.001) and 24-h recalls (food: 6.1 (2.2); alcohol: 5.7 (2.7); p < 0.001), but not different from food records (food: 6.6 (2.0); alcohol: 6.5 (2.3); all p ≥ 0.33). Our results can be used in conjunction with existing data on the reliability and validity of these methods in order to inform the selection of methods for the assessment of food and alcohol intake. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8539386 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-85393862021-10-24 Preference, Expected Burden, and Willingness to Use Digital and Traditional Methods to Assess Food and Alcohol Intake Höchsmann, Christoph Fearnbach, Nicole Dorling, James L. Fazzino, Tera L. Myers, Candice A. Apolzan, John W. Martin, Corby K. Nutrients Article We conducted an online survey to examine the preference, expected burden, and willingness of people to use four different methods of assessing food and alcohol intake such as food/drink record, 24-h recall, Remote Food Photography Method© (RFPM, via SmartIntake(®) app), and a novel app (PortionSize(®)) that allows the in-app portion size estimation of foods/drinks by the user. For food (N = 1959) and alcohol (N = 466) intake assessment, 67.3% and 63.3%, respectively, preferred the RFPM/SmartIntake(®), 51.9% and 53.4% preferred PortionSize(®), 48.0% and 49.3% the food records, and 32.9% and 33.9% the 24-h recalls (difference in preference across all methods was p < 0.001 for food and alcohol intake). Ratings of burden and preference of methods were virtually superimposable, and we found strong correlations between high preference and low expected burden for all methods (all ρ ≥ 0.82; all p < 0.001). Willingness (mean (SD)) to use the RFPM/SmartIntake(®) (food: 6.6 (2.0); alcohol: 6.4 (2.4)) was greater than PortionSize(®) (food: 6.0 (2.2); alcohol: 6.0 (2.4); all p < 0.001) and 24-h recalls (food: 6.1 (2.2); alcohol: 5.7 (2.7); p < 0.001), but not different from food records (food: 6.6 (2.0); alcohol: 6.5 (2.3); all p ≥ 0.33). Our results can be used in conjunction with existing data on the reliability and validity of these methods in order to inform the selection of methods for the assessment of food and alcohol intake. MDPI 2021-09-24 /pmc/articles/PMC8539386/ /pubmed/34684341 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu13103340 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Höchsmann, Christoph Fearnbach, Nicole Dorling, James L. Fazzino, Tera L. Myers, Candice A. Apolzan, John W. Martin, Corby K. Preference, Expected Burden, and Willingness to Use Digital and Traditional Methods to Assess Food and Alcohol Intake |
title | Preference, Expected Burden, and Willingness to Use Digital and Traditional Methods to Assess Food and Alcohol Intake |
title_full | Preference, Expected Burden, and Willingness to Use Digital and Traditional Methods to Assess Food and Alcohol Intake |
title_fullStr | Preference, Expected Burden, and Willingness to Use Digital and Traditional Methods to Assess Food and Alcohol Intake |
title_full_unstemmed | Preference, Expected Burden, and Willingness to Use Digital and Traditional Methods to Assess Food and Alcohol Intake |
title_short | Preference, Expected Burden, and Willingness to Use Digital and Traditional Methods to Assess Food and Alcohol Intake |
title_sort | preference, expected burden, and willingness to use digital and traditional methods to assess food and alcohol intake |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8539386/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34684341 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu13103340 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hochsmannchristoph preferenceexpectedburdenandwillingnesstousedigitalandtraditionalmethodstoassessfoodandalcoholintake AT fearnbachnicole preferenceexpectedburdenandwillingnesstousedigitalandtraditionalmethodstoassessfoodandalcoholintake AT dorlingjamesl preferenceexpectedburdenandwillingnesstousedigitalandtraditionalmethodstoassessfoodandalcoholintake AT fazzinoteral preferenceexpectedburdenandwillingnesstousedigitalandtraditionalmethodstoassessfoodandalcoholintake AT myerscandicea preferenceexpectedburdenandwillingnesstousedigitalandtraditionalmethodstoassessfoodandalcoholintake AT apolzanjohnw preferenceexpectedburdenandwillingnesstousedigitalandtraditionalmethodstoassessfoodandalcoholintake AT martincorbyk preferenceexpectedburdenandwillingnesstousedigitalandtraditionalmethodstoassessfoodandalcoholintake |