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.

doi:10.3390/nu13103340

Titel:: Preference, Expected Burden, and Willingness to Use Digital and Traditional Methods to Assess Food and Alcohol Intake
Dokumenttyp:: Zeitschriftenaufsatz
Autor(en):: Höchsmann, Christoph; Fearnbach, Nicole; Dorling, James L.; Fazzino, Tera L.; Myers, Candice A.; Apolzan, John W.; Martin, Corby K.
Abstract:: 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.
Zeitschriftentitel:: Nutrients
Jahr:: 2021
Band / Volume:: 13
Heft / Issue:: 10
Seitenangaben Beitrag:: 3340
Volltext / DOI:: doi:10.3390/nu13103340
PubMed:: http://view.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34684341
Verlag / Institution:: MDPI AG
E-ISSN:: 2072-6643
Impact Factor:: 6,706
Scimago-Quartil:: Q1
Eingereicht (bei Zeitschrift):: 18.08.2021
Angenommen (von Zeitschrift):: 20.09.2021
Publikationsdatum:: 24.09.2021
BibTeX