Technological tools for assessing children's food intake: a scoping review.

IF 2.4 Q3 NUTRITION & DIETETICS Journal of Nutritional Science Pub Date : 2023-04-11 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1017/jns.2023.27
Jonas de Souza Mata, Jade Veloso Freitas, Sandra Patricia Crispim, Gabriela S Interlenghi, Marcela Baraúna Magno, Daniele Masterson Tavares Pereira Ferreira, Marina Campos Araujo
{"title":"Technological tools for assessing children's food intake: a scoping review.","authors":"Jonas de Souza Mata, Jade Veloso Freitas, Sandra Patricia Crispim, Gabriela S Interlenghi, Marcela Baraúna Magno, Daniele Masterson Tavares Pereira Ferreira, Marina Campos Araujo","doi":"10.1017/jns.2023.27","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Technological innovations can standardise and minimise reporting errors in dietary assessment. This scoping review aimed to summarise the characteristics of technological tools used to assess children's food intake. The review followed the Joanna Briggs Institute's manual. The main inclusion criterion was studied that assessed the dietary intake of children 0-9 years of age using technology. We also considered articles on validation and calibration of technologies. We retrieved 15 119 studies and 279 articles were read in full, after which we selected 93 works that met the eligibility criteria. Forty-six technologies were identified, 37 % of which had been developed in Europe and 32⋅6 % in North America; 65⋅2 % were self-administered; 27 % were used exclusively at home; 37 % involved web-based software and more than 80 % were in children over 6 years of age. 24HR was the most widely used traditional method in the technologies (56⋅5 %), and 47⋅8 % of the tools were validated. The review summarised helpful information for studies on using existing tools or that intend to develop or validate tools with various innovations. It focused on places with a shortage of such technologies.</p>","PeriodicalId":47536,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nutritional Science","volume":"12 ","pages":"e43"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10131056/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nutritional Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jns.2023.27","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Technological innovations can standardise and minimise reporting errors in dietary assessment. This scoping review aimed to summarise the characteristics of technological tools used to assess children's food intake. The review followed the Joanna Briggs Institute's manual. The main inclusion criterion was studied that assessed the dietary intake of children 0-9 years of age using technology. We also considered articles on validation and calibration of technologies. We retrieved 15 119 studies and 279 articles were read in full, after which we selected 93 works that met the eligibility criteria. Forty-six technologies were identified, 37 % of which had been developed in Europe and 32⋅6 % in North America; 65⋅2 % were self-administered; 27 % were used exclusively at home; 37 % involved web-based software and more than 80 % were in children over 6 years of age. 24HR was the most widely used traditional method in the technologies (56⋅5 %), and 47⋅8 % of the tools were validated. The review summarised helpful information for studies on using existing tools or that intend to develop or validate tools with various innovations. It focused on places with a shortage of such technologies.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估儿童食物摄入量的技术工具:范围综述。
技术创新可以使膳食评估标准化并最大限度地减少报告误差。本次范围界定综述旨在总结用于评估儿童食物摄入量的技术工具的特点。综述遵循乔安娜-布里格斯研究所的手册。主要纳入标准是使用技术评估 0-9 岁儿童膳食摄入量的研究。我们还考虑了有关验证和校准技术的文章。我们检索了 15119 项研究,全文阅读了 279 篇文章,然后筛选出 93 篇符合资格标准的作品。我们发现了 46 种技术,其中 37% 是在欧洲开发的,32⋅6% 是在北美开发的;65⋅2% 是自我管理的;27% 是完全在家中使用的;37% 涉及基于网络的软件,80% 以上是针对 6 岁以上儿童的。24HR 是这些技术中使用最广泛的传统方法(56%⋅5%),47%⋅8% 的工具经过验证。综述总结了对使用现有工具或打算开发或验证各种创新工具的研究有帮助的信息。它侧重于缺乏此类技术的地方。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Nutritional Science
Journal of Nutritional Science NUTRITION & DIETETICS-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
91
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Nutritional Science is an international, peer-reviewed, online only, open access journal that welcomes high-quality research articles in all aspects of nutrition. The underlying aim of all work should be, as far as possible, to develop nutritional concepts. JNS encompasses the full spectrum of nutritional science including public health nutrition, epidemiology, dietary surveys, nutritional requirements, metabolic studies, body composition, energetics, appetite, obesity, ageing, endocrinology, immunology, neuroscience, microbiology, genetics, molecular and cellular biology and nutrigenomics. JNS welcomes Primary Research Papers, Brief Reports, Review Articles, Systematic Reviews, Workshop Reports, Letters to the Editor and Obituaries.
期刊最新文献
Exposures to great Chinese Famine during embryo, foetal or infant stages link differently with risks of cardiovascular diseases in late middle age. Elevated BCAA catabolism reverses the effect of branched-chain ketoacids on glucose transport in mTORC1-dependent manner in L6 myotubes. Exploring cultural, social, and biological factors influencing obesity onset in two racial-ethnic groups in Quibdó, Colombia. Identifying the risk factors associated with food insecurity in the UK veteran population: a nationwide survey. A maternal low-protein diet results in sex-specific differences in synaptophysin expression and milk fatty acid profiles in neonatal rats.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1