Center for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), University of Lausanne, 1010 Lausanne, Switzerland.
Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine (ISPM), University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland.
Nutrients. 2022 Feb 1;14(3):635. doi: 10.3390/nu14030635.
Digital dietary assessment devices could help overcome the limitations of traditional tools to assess dietary intake in clinical and/or epidemiological studies. We evaluated the accuracy of the automated dietary app MyFoodRepo (MFR) against controlled reference values from weighted food diaries (WFD). MFR's capability to identify, classify and analyze the content of 189 different records was assessed using Cohen and uniform kappa coefficients and linear regressions. MFR identified 98.0% ± 1.5 of all edible components and was not affected by increasing numbers of ingredients. Linear regression analysis showed wide limits of agreement between MFR and WFD methods to estimate energy, carbohydrates, fat, proteins, fiber and alcohol contents of all records and a constant overestimation of proteins, likely reflecting the overestimation of portion sizes for meat, fish and seafood. The MFR mean portion size error was 9.2% ± 48.1 with individual errors ranging between -88.5% and +242.5% compared to true values. Beverages were impacted by the app's difficulty in correctly identifying the nature of liquids (41.9% ± 17.7 of composed beverages correctly classified). Fair estimations of portion size by MFR, along with its strong segmentation and classification capabilities, resulted in a generally good agreement between MFR and WFD which would be suited for the identification of dietary patterns, eating habits and regime types.
数字饮食评估设备可以帮助克服传统工具在临床和/或流行病学研究中评估饮食摄入的局限性。我们评估了自动饮食应用程序 MyFoodRepo(MFR)对加权食物日记(WFD)的对照参考值的准确性。使用 Cohen 和统一kappa 系数和线性回归评估了 MFR 识别、分类和分析 189 种不同记录内容的能力。MFR 识别了 98.0%±1.5%的所有可食用成分,且不受成分数量增加的影响。线性回归分析表明,MFR 和 WFD 方法之间的估计能量、碳水化合物、脂肪、蛋白质、纤维和酒精含量的协议界限很宽,且对所有记录的蛋白质都存在恒定的高估,这可能反映了对肉、鱼和海鲜的部分大小的高估。MFR 的平均部分大小误差为 9.2%±48.1%,与真实值相比,个体误差范围在-88.5%至+242.5%之间。与 WFD 相比,MFR 对液体的性质正确识别存在困难,这影响了对饮料的评估(41.9%±17.7%的组成饮料被正确分类)。MFR 对部分大小的估计比较准确,加上其强大的分割和分类功能,导致 MFR 和 WFD 之间的总体协议良好,这将适合于识别饮食模式、饮食习惯和饮食类型。