Suppr超能文献

利用食物图像和份量描述文字对份量大小进行估计的准确性:一项评估研究。

The accuracy of portion size estimation using food images and textual descriptions of portion sizes: an evaluation study.

机构信息

Division of Human Nutrition and Health, Wageningen University, The Netherlands.

出版信息

J Hum Nutr Diet. 2021 Dec;34(6):945-952. doi: 10.1111/jhn.12878. Epub 2021 Mar 24.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Inaccurate self-report of portion sizes is a major cause of measurement error in dietary assessment. To reduce this error, different portion size estimation aids (PSEAs) have been developed, including food images (image based, IB-PSE) and textual descriptions of portion sizes (text-based, TB-PSE). We assessed the accuracy of portion size estimation by IB-PSE and TB-PSE.

METHODS

True intake of one lunch was ascertained in forty participants. Self-reported portion sizes were assessed after 2 and 24 hours by means of TB-PSE and IB-PSE, in random order. Wilcoxon's tests were used to compare mean true intakes to reported intakes. Moreover, proportions of reported portion sizes within 10% and 25% of true intake were assessed. An adapted Bland-Altman approach was used to assess agreement between true and reported portion sizes. Analyses were conducted for all foods and drinks combined and for predetermined food types.

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed between reported portion sizes at 2 and 24 hours after lunch. Combining median relative errors of all foods items resulted in an overall 0% error rate for TB-PSE and 6% error rate for IB-PSE. Comparing reported portion sizes within 10% (31% vs. 13%) and 25% (50% vs. 35%) of the true intake showed a better performance for TB-PSE compared to IP-PSE, respectively. Bland-Altman plots indicated a higher agreement between reported and true intake for TB-PSE compared to IB-PSE.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the use of TB-PSE still results in measurement error, our results suggest a more accurate dietary intake assessment with TB-PSE than IB-PSE.

摘要

背景

不准确的自我报告的份量是饮食评估中测量误差的主要原因。为了减少这种误差,已经开发了不同的份量估计辅助工具(PSEA),包括食物图像(基于图像的,IB-PSEA)和份量的文字描述(基于文本的,TB-PSEA)。我们评估了 IB-PSEA 和 TB-PSEA 的份量估计准确性。

方法

在四十名参与者中确定了一顿午餐的真实摄入量。在 2 小时和 24 小时后,通过 TB-PSEA 和 IB-PSEA 以随机顺序评估自我报告的份量。使用 Wilcoxon 检验比较真实摄入量与报告摄入量的平均值。此外,还评估了报告份量在真实摄入量的 10%和 25%以内的比例。使用经过修正的 Bland-Altman 方法评估真实和报告份量之间的一致性。对所有食物和饮料进行了分析,并对预定的食物类型进行了分析。

结果

午餐后 2 小时和 24 小时报告的份量之间没有观察到显著差异。结合所有食物项目的中位数相对误差,TB-PSEA 的总误差率为 0%,IB-PSEA 的误差率为 6%。比较报告份量在真实摄入量的 10%(31%比 13%)和 25%(50%比 35%)以内,TB-PSEA 的表现优于 IB-PSEA。Bland-Altman 图表明,TB-PSEA 与 IB-PSEA 相比,报告的摄入量与真实摄入量之间的一致性更高。

结论

尽管使用 TB-PSEA 仍然会导致测量误差,但我们的结果表明,与 IB-PSEA 相比,TB-PSEA 可以更准确地评估膳食摄入量。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

6
Managing food waste in the inpatient population.管理住院患者人群中的食物浪费。
BMJ Open Qual. 2023 Dec 20;12(4):e002436. doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2023-002436.

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验