Holliday Adrian, Johnson Kelsie Olivia, Kaiseler Mariana, Crabtree Daniel R
Human Nutrition Research Centre, Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Institute for Sport, Physical Activity and Leisure, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, UK.
Br J Nutr. 2023 May 14;129(9):1615-1625. doi: 10.1017/S0007114521003512. Epub 2021 Sep 10.
This study determined the validity, reproducibility and usability of a smartphone app - APPetite - for the measure of free-living, subjective appetite. Validity was assessed compared with the criterion tool of pen-and-paper visual analogue scale (VAS) ( 22). Appetite was recorded using APPetite and VAS, one immediately after the other, upon waking and every hour thereafter for 12 h. This was repeated the next day with the order of tool reversed. Agreement between tools was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis. Reproducibility and usability were assessed in a separate experiment ( 22) of two trials (APPetite . VAS), separated by 7 d. Appetite was recorded in duplicate upon waking and every hour for 12 h using APPetite or VAS. Agreement between duplicate measures was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis and CV was compared between tools. Usability was assessed by comparing compliance and by qualitative evaluation. APPetite demonstrated good criterion validity with trivial bias of 1·65 units/mm·h between APPetite- and VAS-derived AUC appetite scores. Limits of agreement were within a maximum allowed difference of 10 %. However, proportional bias was observed. APPetite demonstrated high reproducibility, with minimal bias (-0·578 units·h) and no difference in CV between APPetite and VAS (1·29 ± 1·42 % . 1·54 ± 2·36 %, = 0·64). Compliance was high with APPetite (92·7 ± 8·0 %) and VAS (91·6 ± 20·4 %, = 0·81). Ninety percent of participants preferred APPetite, citing greater accessibility, simplified process and easier/quicker use. While proportional bias precludes using APPetite and VAS interchangeably, APPetite appears a valid, reproducible and highly usable tool for measuring free-living appetite in young-to-middle-aged adults.
本研究确定了一款智能手机应用程序——APPetite在测量自由生活状态下主观食欲方面的有效性、可重复性和可用性。与纸笔视觉模拟量表(VAS)这一标准工具相比,评估了APPetite的有效性(22)。使用APPetite和VAS记录食欲,醒来后立即依次使用这两种工具,之后每小时记录一次,共记录12小时。第二天重复此过程,工具使用顺序颠倒。使用Bland-Altman分析评估两种工具之间的一致性。在一项单独的实验(22)中,对两项试验(APPetite与VAS)进行了可重复性和可用性评估,两项试验间隔7天。使用APPetite或VAS在醒来时及之后每小时重复记录两次食欲,共记录12小时。使用Bland-Altman分析评估重复测量之间的一致性,并比较两种工具的变异系数(CV)。通过比较依从性和进行定性评估来评估可用性。APPetite显示出良好的标准效度,APPetite和VAS得出的曲线下面积(AUC)食欲评分之间的微小偏差为1.65单位/毫米·小时。一致性界限在最大允许差异的10%以内。然而,观察到了比例偏差。APPetite显示出高可重复性,偏差极小(-0.578单位·小时),APPetite和VAS之间的CV无差异(1.29±1.42%对1.54±2.36%,P = 0.64)。APPetite的依从性较高(92.7±8.0%),VAS的依从性也较高(91.6±20.4%,P = 0.81)。90%的参与者更喜欢APPetite,理由是其更易获取、流程简化且使用更方便/快捷。虽然比例偏差使得APPetite和VAS不能互换使用,但APPetite似乎是测量年轻至中年成年人自由生活状态下食欲的有效、可重复且高度可用工具。