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 < 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 < 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 < 0.001) and 24-h recalls (food: 6.1 (2.2); alcohol: 5.7 (2.7); < 0.001), but not different from food records (food: 6.6 (2.0); alcohol: 6.5 (2.3); all ≥ 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.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8539386PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu13103340DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

food alcohol
32
alcohol intake
16
expected burden
12
food
12
alcohol
9
preference expected
8
burden willingness
8
food records
8
24-h recalls
8
preference methods
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!