Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home

Information:

  • Access
  • Cited by 17
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Forster, Hannah Walsh, Marianne C O'Donovan, Clare B Woolhead, Clara McGirr, Caroline Daly, E.J O'Riordan, Richard Celis-Morales, Carlos Fallaize, Rosalind Macready, Anna L Marsaux, Cyril F M Navas-Carretero, Santiago San-Cristobal, Rodrigo Kolossa, Silvia Hartwig, Kai Mavrogianni, Christina Tsirigoti, Lydia Lambrinou, Christina P Godlewska, Magdalena Surwiłło, Agnieszka Gjelstad, Ingrid Merethe Fange Drevon, Christian A Manios, Yannis Traczyk, Iwona Martinez, J Alfredo Saris, Wim H M Daniel, Hannelore Lovegrove, Julie A Mathers, John C Gibney, Michael J Gibney, Eileen R and Brennan, Lorraine 2016. A Dietary Feedback System for the Delivery of Consistent Personalized Dietary Advice in the Web-Based Multicenter Food4Me Study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, Vol. 18, Issue. 6, p. e150.

    Cade, Janet E. 2017. Measuring diet in the 21st century: use of new technologies. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, Vol. 76, Issue. 03, p. 276.

    Chen, Juliana Lieffers, Jessica Bauman, Adrian Hanning, Rhona and Allman-Farinelli, Margaret 2017. Designing Health Apps to Support Dietetic Professional Practice and Their Patients: Qualitative Results From an International Survey. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, Vol. 5, Issue. 3, p. e40.

    de Roos, Baukje and Brennan, Lorraine 2017. Personalised Interventions—A Precision Approach for the Next Generation of Dietary Intervention Studies. Nutrients, Vol. 9, Issue. 8, p. 847.

    Ordovas, Jose M. 2017. Principles of Gender-Specific Medicine. p. 557.

    Webel, AR Sattar, A Funderburg, NT Kinley, B Longenecker, CT Labbato, D Alam, SM Khurshid and McComsey, GA 2017. Alcohol and dietary factors associate with gut integrity and inflammation in HIV-infected adults. HIV Medicine, Vol. 18, Issue. 6, p. 402.

    Conrad, Johanna and Nöthlings, Ute 2017. Innovative approaches to estimate individual usual dietary intake in large-scale epidemiological studies. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, Vol. 76, Issue. 03, p. 213.

    Berezowska, Aleksandra Fischer, Arnout R.H. and Trijp, Hans C.M. van 2017. The moderating effect of motivation on health-related decision-making. Psychology & Health, Vol. 32, Issue. 6, p. 665.

    Metos, Julie Gren, Lisa Brusseau, Timothy Moric, Endi O’Toole, Karen Mokhtari, Tahereh Buys, Saundra and Frost, Caren 2018. Adolescent girls’ reactions to nutrition and physical activity assessment tools and insight into lifestyle habits. Health Education Journal, Vol. 77, Issue. 1, p. 85.

    Xu, Xiaowei Hou, Li Guo, Zhen Wang, Ju and Li, Jiao 2018. Big Data – BigData 2018. Vol. 10968, Issue. , p. 360.

    Eldridge, Alison Piernas, Carmen Illner, Anne-Kathrin Gibney, Michael Gurinović, Mirjana de Vries, Jeanne and Cade, Janet 2018. Evaluation of New Technology-Based Tools for Dietary Intake Assessment—An ILSI Europe Dietary Intake and Exposure Task Force Evaluation. Nutrients, Vol. 11, Issue. 1, p. 55.

    Xu, Xiaowei Wang, Ju Hou, Li Guo, Zhen and Li, Jiao 2018. A Dietary Management System Using Radio-Frequency Identification Technology to Collect Information on Chinese Food Consumption: Development and Feasibility Study. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, Vol. 6, Issue. 8, p. e166.

    Birch, Catherine S. and Bonwick, Graham A. 2018. Ensuring the future of functional foods. International Journal of Food Science & Technology,

    Ladyzynski, Piotr Krzymien, Janusz Foltynski, Piotr Rachuta, Monika and Bonalska, Barbara 2018. Accuracy of Automatic Carbohydrate, Protein, Fat and Calorie Counting Based on Voice Descriptions of Meals in People with Type 1 Diabetes. Nutrients, Vol. 10, Issue. 4, p. 518.

    Navas-Carretero, Santiago San-Cristobal, Rodrigo Livingstone, Katherine M. Celis-Morales, Carlos Marsaux, Cyril F. Macready, Anna L. Fallaize, Rosalind O’Donovan, Clare B. Forster, Hannah Woolhead, Clara Moschonis, George Lambrinou, Christina P. Jarosz, Miroslaw Manios, Yannis Daniel, Hannelore Gibney, Eileen R. Brennan, Lorraine Walsh, Marianne C. Drevon, Christian A. Gibney, Mike Saris, Wim H. M. Lovegrove, Julie A. Mathers, John C. and Martinez, J. Alfredo 2018. Higher vegetable protein consumption, assessed by an isoenergetic macronutrient exchange model, is associated with a lower presence of overweight and obesity in the web-based Food4me European study. International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition, p. 1.

    Ashton, Lee Williams, Rebecca Wood, Lisa Schumacher, Tracy Burrows, Tracy Rollo, Megan Pezdirc, Kristine Callister, Robin and Collins, Clare E. 2018. The comparative validity of a brief diet screening tool for adults: The Fruit And Vegetable VAriety index (FAVVA). Clinical Nutrition ESPEN,

    Amoutzopoulos, B. Steer, T. Roberts, C. Cade, J. E. Boushey, C. J. Collins, C. E. Trolle, E. Boer, E. J. de Ziauddeen, N. van Rossum, C. Buurma, E. Coyle, D. and Page, P. 2018. Traditional methods v. new technologies – dilemmas for dietary assessment in large-scale nutrition surveys and studies: a report following an international panel discussion at the 9th International Conference on Diet and Activity Methods (ICDAM9), Brisbane, 3 September 2015. Journal of Nutritional Science, Vol. 7, Issue. ,

    ×

Actions:

      • Send article to Kindle

        To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

        Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

        Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

        Personalised nutrition: the role of new dietary assessment methods
        Available formats
        ×

        Send article to Dropbox

        To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

        Personalised nutrition: the role of new dietary assessment methods
        Available formats
        ×

        Send article to Google Drive

        To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

        Personalised nutrition: the role of new dietary assessment methods
        Available formats
        ×
Export citation

Abstract

Food records or diaries, dietary recalls and FFQ are methods traditionally used to measure dietary intake; however, advancing technologies and growing awareness in personalised health have heightened interest in the application of new technologies to assess dietary intake. Dietary intake data can be used in epidemiology, dietary interventions and in the delivery of personalised nutrition advice. Compared with traditional dietary assessment methods, new technologies have many advantages, including their ability to automatically process data and provide personalised dietary feedback advice. This review examines the new technologies presently under development for the assessment of dietary intakes, and their utilisation and efficacy for personalising dietary advice. New technology-based methods of dietary assessment can broadly be categorised into three key areas: online (web-based) methods, mobile methods and sensor technologies. Several studies have demonstrated that utilising new technologies to provide tailored advice can result in positive dietary changes and have a significant impact on selected nutrient and food group intakes. However, comparison across studies indicates that the magnitude of change is variable and may be influenced by several factors, including the frequency and type of feedback provided. Future work should establish the most effective combinations of these factors in facilitating dietary changes across different population groups.

Worldwide, the prevalence of overweight and obesity has escalated by 27·5 % in adults from 1980 to 2013( 1 ), with more than 1·6 billion adults presently considered to be overweight or obese globally( 2 ). Poor dietary profiles characterised by energy dense, high-fat diets, with low fruit and vegetable intakes, are associated with increased risk of diet-related non-communicable diseases such as CVD, type 2 diabetes and some cancers( 3 ), and are modifiable factors for reducing obesity risk( 4 ). Face-to-face behavioural change programmes or intervention studies, which aim to alter dietary intake and/or increase physical activity have been shown to result in significant weight loss( 5 ). However, the feasibility of these programmes on a large scale, required to stimulate widespread changes in diet and physical activity, and help reduce the rising prevalence of obesity is limited, indicating that there is a growing need for alternative effective strategies.

Advances in the field of nutritional science have facilitated the shift from the ‘one size fits all’ general population-based guidelines to more personalised dietary recommendations( 6 , 7 ). Existing nutrient intake recommendations are presently differentiated for subgroups of the population based on factors including age, sex and physiological status( 6 , 8 , 9 ). However, growing evidence has demonstrated that providing individuals with more specific personalised feedback advice can be more effective than generic information in improving a variety of dietary outcomes, including reducing fat intakes and increasing fruit and vegetable intakes( 10 12 ). To provide personalised advice, an appropriate method for measuring and assessing dietary intake is required.

Traditionally dietary intakes have been assessed using weighed or non-weighed food diaries, paper-based FFQ and telephone or in-person administered 24 h recalls( 13 , 14 ). However, with advances in technology and growth of consumer interest in personal health, there is increasing research into the application of new technology-based dietary assessment methods for providing personalised dietary advice more efficiently( 3 , 15 17 ). Compared with traditional dietary assessment methods, these instruments can collect dietary intake data more easily across large geographically dispersed populations( 18 ), and therefore have greater potential to provide personalised dietary advice on the large scale. Furthermore, in contrast with the traditional methods of dietary assessment, technology-based methods are less expensive, can be completed at the participants’ convenience and are associated with reduced researcher burden as nutrient intakes can be generated automatically( 19 21 ). This has the further advantage of enabling feedback advice to be pre-programmed and potentially delivered in real-time( 22 ). The objectives of the present review are to (i) examine the range of new technologies developed for the assessment of dietary intakes and (ii) assess the utilisation and efficacy of new technologies for providing personalised dietary advice.

New technologies for dietary assessment

The digital revolution has evolved the process in which dietary assessment methods are administered and dietary intakes are measured, resulting in a rise in the development of new technology-based instruments for assessing dietary intakes( 23 28 ). These new instruments can be broadly categorised into three key areas: online (web-based) methods; mobile methods; sensor technologies. Evidence has demonstrated several of these newer methods of dietary assessment to be preferred over traditional methods by an array of population groups, including adolescents and adults( 21 , 22 , 29 , 30 ). Furthermore, the feasibility of utilising technology-based methods to collect dietary intake data within specific population groups is also being explored with novel tools being developed for both children and older adults( 31 , 32 ). As new technologies for dietary assessment are frequently used in nutrition research and increasingly utilised to provide personalised dietary advice, it is important that they are designed to facilitate fundamental updates, such as the updating of nutritional composition data, to prevent them from becoming swiftly redundant and replaced by improved versions.

Online (web-based) methods of dietary assessment

Global increases in Internet usage and availability over the past decade have resulted in online (web-based) methods of dietary assessment becoming popular for assessing dietary intakes for both research and commercial purposes( 33 ). Unlike the traditional paper-based methods of dietary assessment, online methods possess many benefits: they can be pre-programmed with plausibility and completeness checks, probing questions and can be developed to incorporate food photographs to enhance food recognition and portion size estimation( 18 , 19 , 21 ). As illustrated in Table 1, the majority of tools developed to date are centred around 24 h recalls and FFQ, with fewer examples of food diaries/records( 22 ). Nonetheless, studies have shown online food records to be comparable with paper-based records in their ability to estimate energy intake and subsequent associated levels of underreporting( 22 , 34 ).

Table 1. Online (web-based) dietary assessment tools for the collection of dietary intake data in adults

ASA24, automated self-administered 24-h recall; AMPM, automated multiple-pass method; DHQ, diet history questionnaire.

To date, numerous online (web-based) 24 h recalls have been developed for the collection of dietary intake data both within adults and children( 21 , 35 39 ). As outlined in Table 1, ASA24, DietDay, NutriNet Sante and the Oxford WebQ are web-based 24 h recalls developed for the assessment of dietary intake data for adults, which have been shown to be comparable with other methods of dietary assessment( 21 , 38 41 ). ASA24 is a web-based 24 h recall based on the automated multiple-pass method that is available for use by clinicians, educators and researchers( 38 ). The tool has a dynamic user interface which features an animated guide and audio and visual cues( 38 ), and has been demonstrated to have reasonable agreement with an interview-administered automated multiple-pass method for selected nutrients and food groups( 41 ). DietDay is similar to ASA24, as it also applies multipasses analogous to the automated multiple-pass method( 42 ). DietDay consists of 9349 food items and more than 7000 food images( 42 ), and has been shown to have greater validity than a paper-based FFQ using the doubly labelled water method( 39 ).

Several studies have also been published regarding the development and use of online FFQ for the estimation of dietary intake, with the majority of online FFQ based on previously validated FFQ or country-specific food guides( 19 , 20 , 25 , 30 , 33 , 43 45 ). Like the traditional paper-based FFQ, online FFQ vary in their population of interest, inclusion of photographs and number of food items. Key features for several of the online FFQ developed for collecting dietary intake data within adults are presented in Table 1. The online Food4Me FFQ was recently developed for the collection of dietary intake data across seven European countries and has been translated into six languages( 33 ). This FFQ lists food items (157 in the English-language version) and requires a response regarding the frequency and portion size consumption of each individual food item over the past month( 33 ). Although the Food4Me FFQ is similar in format to traditional FFQ, online FFQ also have the flexibility to differ from this conventional list-style format. For example, GraFFS is a recently developed algorithm-driven FFQ which presents users with thumbnail illustrations of food items within a food category; from these users then select the food items which they have consumed at least once in the past month, and only these food items are further questioned( 25 ). Thus far, evidence examining the validity of online FFQ to other dietary assessment methods has been varied. Several studies have found online FFQ to be highly correlated with 24 h recalls and comparable with food records( 19 , 25 ). For example, the Food4Me FFQ has been shown to have good agreement with a paper-based FFQ and moderate agreement with a 4-d weighed food record for estimating both nutrient and food group intakes( 30 , 33 ). Meanwhile, other studies have shown online FFQ to result in poorer estimation of food groups when compared with traditionally administered dietary recalls and weighed food records( 20 , 45 ). This variability is commonly observed with FFQ regardless of their mode of administration, and usability analyses have indicated that individuals would be more willing to complete online methods of dietary assessment over the traditional methods( 21 , 30 ).

Mobile methods of dietary assessment

Initially, personal digital assistants (PDA) were the leading mobile method for assessing dietary intakes, being utilised from the mid-1990s. These devices contained an integrated pre-defined drop-down list of foods, typically ranging from 180 to >4000 items( 18 ), and have been demonstrated to be comparable with traditional methods of dietary assessment( 46 48 ). Progressions in technology have however resulted in smartphone use surpassing PDA as the foremost mobile method of dietary assessment( 16 , 26 , 49 ), with growing research emerging into the use of smartphones to measure dietary intakes using both applications (app) and image-based methods( 50 ). Smartphones have huge potential in the measurement of dietary intake and delivery of low-cost interventions to large population groups( 51 ). Statistics show their use/ownership is increasing among a variety of age groups and they are usually carried by the individual, enabling users to record data conveniently and discretely in real-time( 26 , 52 , 53 ).

App for tracking dietary intake can be solely dietary based or integrated into other app such as physical activity app e.g. My Fitness Pal( 54 ). Although many smartphone app are available for tracking dietary intake, publications regarding the validity and accuracy of many of these app are limited( 54 ). ‘My Meal Mate’ is an exception; this electronic food diary smartphone app is designed to facilitate weight loss and consists of a 40 000 food item database containing both generic and branded food items( 26 ). Although this app has been shown to be well correlated with two 24 h recalls for estimating energy and macronutrient intakes, it was demonstrated to have large variability in estimating individual energy intakes( 26 ). Therefore, considering many smartphone app are used and targeted to the individual, there is a need for future studies to establish the validity of utilising smartphone app for the assessment of dietary intakes at the individual level. Notwithstanding their ability to accurately capture dietary intake data, evidence examining use of mobile app have found them to be more effective than paper diaries in reducing energy intakes after 6 months( 55 ), highlighting their potential for dietary interventions.

Advances in technology have also led to the utilisation of smartphones for image-based methods of dietary assessment( 56 ). These image-based methods require the user to photograph their foods/meals along with a fiducial marker before and after eating, and therefore have the potential to diminish the burden to the user that is commonly associated with other methods of dietary assessment( 28 ). Presently, two approaches for image-based assessment have been described in the literature: those requiring human input (e.g. remote food photography method) and those not requiring human input (e.g. the technology assisted dietary assessment mobile phone food record and DietCam)( 28 , 52 , 57 , 58 ). With the remote food photography method images are sent wirelessly to a Food Photography Application where trained analysts compare the sent images with a catalogue of images of foods of known portion sizes to estimate food intake( 58 , 59 ). Evidence has demonstrated that this method underestimated energy intake by only 3·7 % compared with the doubly labelled water method( 59 ). Furthermore, comparisons of nutrient intake estimates from the remote food photography method and two laboratory-based weighed meals showed no significant differences for energy, macro or micronutrient intakes with the exception of vitamin A and cholesterol (P < 0·01)( 59 ). In contrast, the technology assisted dietary assessment mobile phone food record uses built in integrated image classification, analysis and visualisation tools to automatically estimate the amount of food and nutrients consumed at each meal( 28 , 60 ). This method has been shown to be more limited in its ability to distinguish between similarly shaped and coloured food items e.g. brownies and chocolate cake( 60 ). However, image-based methods are being designed to incorporate developments such as voice recognition, to overcome many errors associated with automated food item classification( 50 ).

Sensor technologies

In recent years, use of wearable sensor technologies for measurement of dietary intake has emerged( 27 ). These devices take photographic images while being worn, which capture a range of data and health activities, and can be used to estimate nutritional intake without self-reporting( 24 ). Some of these devices, such as the Microsoft SenseCam, have been used in conjunction with other methods of dietary assessment to help improve their accuracy by capturing information that may be incorrectly estimated or unreported e.g. left overs, portion sizes and unrecalled food items( 61 ). Evidence has shown that the application of a paper diary together with the Microsoft SenseCam resulted in more accurate estimations of portion size data and subsequent energy intakes when compared with using the diary alone( 61 ). In this study, forty-seven participants were recruited and requested to wear the SenseCam for 1 d while simultaneously recording a 1-d food diary( 61 ). Data from the SenseCam and food diary were reviewed by a dietitian and any discrepancies between the methods were identified( 61 ). Moving forward from this concept, the eButton is another sensor device that has been recently developed, which can automatically estimate the nutritional composition of food items through integrated food segmentation, volume estimation, modelling and fitting processes( 27 ). This device is a small lightweight decorative button, worn on the chest, which encompasses a camera and passively photographs foods every 2 s to record the eating process ( 27 ) . Although there is future potential for such devices in estimating dietary intake, the ability to automatically estimate the nutritional composition of the wide variety of foods and meals consumed on a daily basis from food photographs is a complex process. Recent accuracy evaluations for the eButton demonstrated its error rate to be about 30 % for regularly shaped foods, and significantly larger for irregularly shaped or occluded food items( 27 ), indicating that further development is required before these devices will be applied for automatically estimating nutritional intakes.

Application of new technology-based dietary assessment tools for personalised nutrition

These technology-based dietary assessment instruments can be developed into or integrated with tools which provide personalised or tailored dietary feedback advice, and therefore have the potential to help individuals to make positive sustainable changes to their dietary behaviours. These instruments are being increasingly utilised in intervention studies to provide personalised or tailored feedback, with numerous randomised controlled trials demonstrating this personalised advice to be more effective than generic advice in improving selected dietary outcomes( 17 , 62 , 63 ).

As illustrated in Table 2, PDA, online FFQ and web-based dietary questionnaires have all been utilised for providing personalised dietary advice, with studies in recent years also examining the potential for smartphone app to provide tailored or personalised feedback advice( 15 , 16 ). A smartphone app that can capture dietary and physical activity information and provide personalised recommendations has been developed for use in the EVIDENT II trial( 16 ). This app encompasses a food diary to enable users to record their daily food intake, evaluates the user's food intake, and provides personalised recommendations to help facilitate changes in dietary habits( 16 ). In addition, smartphones applying image-based assessment (requiring input from trained analysts) have recently been used in the Connecting Health and Technology project to assess nutritional intake and provide tailored feedback advice and text messages to young adults to promote changes in consumption of fruit, vegetables and junk food( 15 ). Results regarding the efficacy of utilising these smartphone-based tools to provide personalised advice are yet to be published.

Table 2. Summary of randomised controlled trials utilising new technology-based dietary assessment instruments to provide personalised/tailored advice

PDA, personal digital assistant.

Efficacy of technology-based tools in providing personalised dietary advice

To date, several studies have utilised online FFQ to assess dietary intake to aid the provision of personalised dietary advice (Table 2). In 2011, Maes et al. demonstrated that using an online FFQ, consisting of 137 food items, to collect dietary data and provide tailored advice for fibre, vitamin C, calcium, iron and fat, to adolescents (n 713), only resulted in significant improvements in fat intake in overweight adolescents( 45 , 64 ). Online FFQ have also recently been used to measure dietary intake and provide tailored advice as part of a nutrition education intervention within adults, as illustrated in Table 2 ( 17 ). However, this study showed similar variation in the efficacy of tailored advice for improving nutrient and food group intakes. Following the intervention, participants receiving tailored advice reported significantly lower saturated fat and high-energy snack intakes, compared with participants receiving non-tailored advice. However, the tailored advice had no effect on vegetable intakes and only limited impact on changes in fruit intake( 17 ). The validated FFQ utilised to assess fruit, vegetable, fat and high-fat snack intakes used six, four, thirty-five and twenty-one food items to measure intakes of each of these dietary outcomes, respectively. Therefore, it is possible that the ability of these instruments to identify changes in fruit and vegetable intakes between the control and intervention groups was limited by the low number of food items used to assess fruit and vegetable intakes. However, Sternfeld et al.( 62 ) have previously demonstrated that using an online dietary questionnaire, consisting of only thirty-five food items, to assess dietary intake and provide tailored feedback advice for fruit and vegetables and fat and sugar, resulted in significant improvements to saturated fat, trans fat and fruit and vegetable intakes both immediately and 4 months post-intervention. This would therefore indicate that numerous other factors, relating more directly to the feedback itself and the target population, also influence the efficacy of utilising technology-based instruments to provide effective personalised advice, as illustrated in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1. Factors influencing the efficacy of new technology-based instruments in providing personalised/tailored advice to improve dietary intake.

As detailed in Table 2, in the study by Sternfeld et al.( 62 ), the intervention was a 16-week email program during which intervention participants firstly chose the area they wanted to target and secondly chose one to two goals to achieve each week. Providing individuals with the opportunity to choose the goals they want to target may be an important factor influencing the efficacy of tailored/personalised dietary feedback and magnitude of behaviour change. This is because individuals will tend to choose goals that are of more interest to them and are subsequently more likely to achieve. Another factor, however, that also differed between this study and the two previously discussed, was the frequency in which feedback was provided. The study where feedback was provided more frequently was associated with greater changes in a variety of dietary outcomes. Concurrent with this, recent evidence has shown the application of PDA to provide daily tailored advice to have a considerable impact on dietary behaviours( 63 ). Participants who received daily tailored energy and fat feedback messages delivered remotely on a PDA in real-time significantly reduced their energy (P = 0·03) and saturated fat intake (P = 0·04) after 24 months compared with participants receiving no daily feedback messages( 63 ). Mean differences in energy and fat intake at 24 months were −9·3 and −12·7 % greater, respectively, for those who received the daily tailored feedback messages compared with those receiving no daily feedback messages( 63 ).

In addition to the frequency of feedback, the mode of delivery of personalised advice is another element that could influence the efficacy of personalised dietary advice. Personalised feedback advice can be delivered to users in a variety of formats, such as onscreen messages or detailed reports. The format in which advice is delivered is often dependent on the method of assessment: with smartphones or PDA feedback advice is customarily delivered as onscreen messages( 63 ), whereas with online tools feedback advice could either be delivered in the form of a report or made available on a personalised homepage( 62 ). An earlier study examining the impact of delivering interactive (designed to mimic web-based tailored feedback), print-delivered computer-tailored feedback advice and generic feedback information on saturated fat intake found the two tailored feedback conditions to have similar short-term reduction effects( 65 ). However, after 6 months, reduction effects were maintained only in participants receiving the print-delivered tailored feedback. One possible explanation is that it is potentially easier and less burdensome to read and reread printed information more thoroughly than on-screen information( 65 , 66 ). However, latter studies have shown the Internet to be a successful method for delivering tailored or personalised advice( 17 , 62 ). Furthermore, using the Internet to administer personalised advice can enable greater interactivity with the feedback provided as there is the potential to encompass additional tools including homepages and discussion forums( 67 , 68 ).

In summary, although several studies have demonstrated that technology-based dietary assessment tools can be used to provide tailored/personalised advice that is more effective in changing dietary behaviours than generic information, evaluation across studies would indicate that the magnitude of change is variable and may be affected by several factors as summarised in Fig. 1. This is in agreement with a systematic review which identified several factors, such as target population, target behaviours and mode of delivery, as potential contributors to the variable effectiveness of e-learning interventions on improving dietary behaviours.( 69 )

Translating nutrient intake data into personalised advice

Although progressively more dietary assessment instruments are being used to provide tailored or personalised dietary advice, literature regarding the processes in which personalised advice is generated by these tools is largely limited. A simplified process for generating computer-tailored dietary messages was outlined in 1999: results from a baseline questionnaire are entered into a data file which is subsequently linked by computer software (using pre-programmed algorithms) to an appropriate feedback message(s)( 68 ). The appropriate message(s) are selected from a message archive and then assembled into a predefined format. However since then, developments in technology have advanced this process; nutritional intake data are automatically generated from new technology-based dietary assessment instruments and algorithms can be used to automatically generate feedback advice. Several studies have briefly referred to the use of decision tree algorithms to generate appropriate feedback advice from nutritional intake data( 63 , 64 ). The web-based computer-tailored nutrition intervention, developed for adolescents in the HELENA study, consisted of three key components: a validated FFQ, a food composition database and a decision tree algorithm to provide tailored advice( 64 ). The decision tree algorithm was designed to compare reported nutrient intakes with recommendations and provide food-based advice when intakes differed from recommendations( 64 ). More complex systems have since been developed which enable feedback advice to be transmitted in real-time. For example, an automated investigator-developed algorithm linking dietary intake data from PDA devices to feedback messages was recently constructed in four time-related categories which were further differentiated into five sections resembling goal attainment, enabling feedback messages to be delivered in real-time( 63 ). Largely as illustrated in Table 2, the majority of studies utilising technology-based dietary assessment tools have been developed to provide tailored or personalised advice for a small selection of nutrients/food groups only( 15 , 17 , 62 , 63 ), with limited studies personalising advice for extended lists of nutrients( 3 , 64 ). Personalised advice is most commonly provided for nutrients and food groups considered to be important constituents of a healthy/unhealthy diet, predominately saturated fat, fruit and vegetables( 70 ). The Food4Me study is one of the few exceptions that developed a multi-step system for personalising advice for a larger range of nutrients. In this study, an online FFQ was used to assess dietary intake. Decision trees were developed to link nutritional intake data from the FFQ to feedback messages, and provide participants with personalised feedback advice for three nutrient-related goals( 3 ). The three nutrient-related goals were derived based on their risk status (deviations from recommendations) and selected from a possible seventeen nutrients( 3 ).

Furthermore, given that behaviour change is considered to be a multi-stage process, strategies to help increase motivation and stimulate changes in dietary behaviour may often be incorporated in both the process of generating personalised feedback and in the content of feedback( 71 , 72 ). For example identifying an individual's stage of change may function as a diagnostic variable for determining specific messages to be given in tailored feedback( 67 , 71 , 73 ). Feedback that is tailored based on both present dietary intakes and stage of change may be considered to be more motivational and may be more effective in promoting change than advice that is tailored based on dietary intakes only( 73 ). To date elements from a variety of behavioural models have been applied in personalising dietary advice, including goal-setting, social marketing and the transtheoretical model( 62 ). Evidence has shown that interventions incorporating specific behaviour change techniques, such as goal setting and use of prompts, demonstrated greater effects on fruit and vegetable intakes when compared with studies without these techniques( 74 ). In tandem with this concept, another important factor which could be central to the efficacy of new technology-based tools in providing personalised advice is whether individuals respond differently to varying types of feedback (content, delivery and frequency). For example, some individuals may prefer and respond greater to receiving brief feedback more frequently, whereas others may benefit more from detailed feedback sent less frequently.

Content of personalised dietary advice

Evidently a fundamental feature of any tailored feedback report is that it is personalised to the individual. Research suggests that addressing the individual's name and other recognisable personal characteristics leads to increased involvement with the feedback messages( 68 ). Specific feedback provided in tailored or personalised interventions is often varied. Many studies to date have included graphs to compare intakes with recommended levels; with intakes of peers of same age/sex; and to display improvements from previously attained levels( 62 , 66 , 67 , 75 ). The combination of providing an individual with personal feedback on their own fat intake along with normative feedback (ones level in relation to their peers or average national intakes) and actions for how to change their intake was previously shown to be beneficial to improve awareness of and induce changes in fat intake( 67 ). However, it has also been demonstrated that a combination of comparing intakes with guideline amounts and providing recommendations for improvement can help towards promoting changes in dietary behaviours( 62 ). Randomised controlled trials have delivered feedback advice consisting of suggestions for improvement, including top sources of problematic nutrients( 62 ), food-based messages to help improve nutrient-intakes( 3 ) and information relating to potential barriers to change( 17 ). Although the specific content of messages is important, another aspect that must be considered, particularly when feedback is delivered frequently, relates to how often message content is renewed. Previous studies have shown that feedback message content and structure need to be refreshed at regular intervals to prevent individuals becoming desensitised to feedback messages, and therefore sustain long-term changes( 63 , 76 ).

Conclusion

Numerous new technology-based instruments have been established for the assessment of dietary intakes, and are presently under varying stages of development. These instruments have considerable advantages for the assessment of dietary intakes, including reduced burden to both users and researchers. Although evidence has shown several of these instruments, predominately online methods, to be reliable approaches for assessing nutrient intakes, there is a need to further examine the validity and usability of the wider variety of these instruments e.g. mobile methods and sensor technologies, across different population groups. New technology-based instruments have large potential for providing personalised nutrition advice, and improving dietary and lifestyle choices on a widespread level. Presently several randomised controlled trials have examined the use of these instruments for providing tailored or personalised advice, and demonstrated varying levels of effectiveness. Comparisons across studies would however indicate that the efficacy of utilising new technology-based dietary assessment tools to provide effective personalised advice is dependent on a number of factors, including feedback content, frequency and delivery, population group, sensitivity of the assessment instrument to changes in dietary outcomes, and the processes involved in personalising feedback. Future work should ascertain the most effective combinations of these factors in promoting sustained dietary changes across different population groups.

Financial Support

This work was supported by the Food4Me Study which funded the PhD scholarship for H. F. Food4Me is funded by the European Commission under the Food, Agriculture, Fisheries and Biotechnology Theme of the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (grant number 265494).

Conflicts of Interest

None.

Authorship

H. F. drafted the manuscript. M. C. W., M. J. G., L. B. and E. R. G. critically evaluated the manuscript. All authors approved the final version.

References

1. Ng, M, Fleming, T, Robinson, M et al. (2014) Global, regional, and national prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adults during 1980–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Lancet 384, 766781.
2. World Health Organisation (2015) Obesity and overweight fact sheet. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs311/en/ (accessed March 2015).
3. Celis-Morales, C, Livingstone, KM, Marsaux, CF et al. (2015) Design and baseline characteristics of the Food4Me study: a web-based randomised controlled trial of personalised nutrition in seven European countries. Genes Nutr 10, 450.
4. Wright, JL, Sherriff, JL, Dhaliwal, SS et al. (2011) Tailored, iterative, printed dietary feedback is as effective as group education in improving dietary behaviours: results from a randomised control trial in middle-aged adults with cardiovascular risk factors. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 8, 43.
5. Brandt, CJ, Brandt, V, Pedersen, M et al. (2014) Long-term effect of interactive online dietician weight Loss Advice in General Practice (LIVA) protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Int J Family Med. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/245347
6. Joost, HG, Gibney, MJ, Cashman, KD et al. (2007) Personalised nutrition: status and perspectives. Br J Nutr 98, 2631.
7. Ronteltap, A, van Trijp, H, Berezowska, A et al. (2013) Nutrigenomics-based personalised nutritional advice: in search of a business model?. Genes Nutr 8, 153163.
8. de Roos, B (2013) Personalised nutrition: ready for practice? Proc Nutr Soc 72, 4852.
9. Department of Health (1991) Dietary Reference Values for Food Energy and Nutrients for the United Kingdom: Report of the Panel on Dietary Reference Values of the Committee on Medical Aspects of Food Policy. London: The Stationary Office.
10. Lustria, ML, Cortese, J, Noar, SM et al. (2009) Computer-tailored health interventions delivered over the Web: review and analysis of key components. Patient Educ Couns 74, 156173.
11. Lustria, ML, Noar, SM, Cortese, J et al. (2013) A meta-analysis of web-delivered tailored health behavior change interventions. J Health Commun 18, 10391069.
12. Ezendam, NP, Brug, J & Oenema, A (2012) Evaluation of the Web-based computer-tailored FATaintPHAT intervention to promote energy balance among adolescents: results from a school cluster randomized trial. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 166, 248255.
13. Biro, G, Hulshof, KF, Ovesen, L et al. (2002) Selection of methodology to assess food intake. Eur J Clin Nutr 56, S25S32.
14. Thompson, FE, Subar, AF, Loria, CM et al. (2010) Need for technological innovation in dietary assessment. J Am Diet Assoc 110, 4851.
15. Kerr, DA, Pollard, CM, Howat, P et al. (2012) Connecting Health and Technology (CHAT): protocol of a randomized controlled trial to improve nutrition behaviours using mobile devices and tailored text messaging in young adults. BMC Public Health 12, 477.
16. Recio-Rodríguez, JI, Martín-Cantera, C, González-Viejo, N et al. (2014) Effectiveness of a smartphone application for improving healthy lifestyles, a randomized clinical trial (EVIDENT II): study protocol. BMC Public Health 14, 254.
17. Springvloet, L, Lechner, L, de Vries, H et al. (2015) Short- and medium-term efficacy of a web-based computer-tailored nutrition education intervention for adults including cognitive and environmental feedback: randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res 17, e23.
18. Illner, AK, Freisling, H, Boeing, H et al. (2012) Review and evaluation of innovative technologies for measuring diet in nutritional epidemiology. Int J Epidemiol 41, 11871203.
19. Labonte, ME, Cyr, A, Baril-Gravel, L et al. (2012) Validity and reproducibility of a web-based, self-administered food frequency questionnaire. Eur J Clin Nutr 66, 166173.
20. Matthys, C, Pynaert, I, De Keyzer, W et al. (2007) Validity and reproducibility of an adolescent web-based food frequency questionnaire. J Am Diet Assoc 107, 605610.
21. Touvier, M, Kesse-Guyot, E, Méjean, C et al. (2011) Comparison between an interactive web-based self-administered 24 h dietary record and an interview by a dietitian for large-scale epidemiological studies. Br J Nutr 105, 10551064.
22. Hutchesson, MJ, Rollo, ME, Callister, R et al. (2015) Self-monitoring of dietary intake by young women: online food records completed on computer or smartphone are as accurate as paper-based food records but more acceptable. J Acad Nutr Diet 115, 8794.
23. Ngo, J, Engelen, A, Molag, M et al. (2009) A review of the use of information and communication technologies for dietary assessment. Br J Nutr 101, S102S112.
24. Stumbo, PJ (2013) New technology in dietary assessment: a review of digital methods in improving food record accuracy. Proc Nutr Soc 72, 7076.
25. Kristal, AR, Kolar, AS, Fisher, JL et al. (2014) Evaluation of web-based, self-administered, graphical food frequency questionnaire. J Acad Nutr Diet 114, 613621.
26. Carter, MC, Burley, VJ, Nykjaer, C et al. (2013) ‘My Meal Mate’ (MMM): validation of the diet measures captured on a smartphone application to facilitate weight loss. Br J Nutr 109, 539546.
27. Sun, M, Burke, L, Mao, Z et al. (2014) eButton: a wearable computer for health monitoring and personal assistance. Proc Des Autom Conf 2014, 16.
28. Schap, TE, Zhu, F, Delp, EJ et al. (2014) Merging dietary assessment with the adolescent lifestyle. J Hum Nutr Diet 27, S82S88.
29. Boushey, CJ, Kerr, DA, Wright, J et al. (2009) Use of technology in children's dietary assessment. Eur J Clin Nutr 63, S50S57.
30. Fallaize, R, Forster, H, Macready, AL et al. (2014) Online dietary intake estimation: reproducibility and validity of the food4me food frequency questionnaire against a 4-day weighed food record. J Med Internet Res 16, e190.
31. Foster, E, Hawkins, A, Delve, J et al. (2014) Reducing the cost of dietary assessment: self-completed recall and analysis of nutrition for use with children (SCRAN24). J Hum Nutr Diet 27, S26S35.
32. Timon, CM, Astell, AJ, Hwang, F et al. (2015) The validation of a computer-based food record for older adults: the Novel Assessment of Nutrition and Ageing (NANA) method. Br J Nutr 113, 654664.
33. Forster, H, Fallaize, R, Gallagher, C et al. (2014) Online dietary intake estimation: the Food4Me food frequency questionnaire. J Med Internet Res 16, e150.
34. Hutchesson, MJ, Truby, H, Callister, R et al. (2013) Can a web-based food record accurately assess energy intake in overweight and obese women? A pilot study. J Hum Nutr Diet 26, S140S144.
35. Douglass, D, Islam, N, Baranowski, J et al. (2013) Simulated adaptations to an adult dietary self-report tool to accommodate children: impact on nutrient estimates. J Am Coll Nutr 32, 9297.
36. Biltoft-Jensen, A, Trolle, E, Christensen, T et al. (2014) WebDASC: a web-based dietary assessment software for 8–11-year-old Danish children. J Hum Nutr Diet 27, S43S53.
37. Moore, HJ, Hillier, FC, Batterham, AM et al. (2014) Technology-based dietary assessment: development of the Synchronised Nutrition and Activity Program (SNAP). J Hum Nutr Diet 27, S36S42.
38. Subar, AF, Kirkpatrick, SI, Mittl, B et al. (2012) The Automated Self-Administered 24-hour dietary recall (ASA24): a resource for researchers, clinicians, and educators from the National Cancer Institute. J Acad Nutr Diet 112, 11341137.
39. Arab, L, Tseng, CH, Ang, A et al. (2011) Validity of a multipass, web-based, 24-hour self-administered recall for assessment of total energy intake in blacks and whites. Am J Epidemiol 174, 12561265.
40. Liu, B, Young, H, Crowe, FL et al. (2011) Development and evaluation of the Oxford WebQ, a low-cost, web-based method for assessment of previous 24 h dietary intakes in large-scale prospective studies. Public Health Nutr 14, 19982005.
41. Kirkpatrick, SI, Subar, AF, Douglass, D et al. (2014) Performance of the automated self-administered 24-hour recall relative to a measure of true intakes and to an interviewer-administered 24-h recall. Am J Clin Nutr 100, 233240.
42. Arab, L, Wesseling-Perry, K, Jardack, P et al. (2010) Eight self-administered 24-hour dietary recalls using the Internet are feasible in African Americans and Whites: the energetics study. J Am Diet Assoc 110, 857864.
43. González Carrascosa, R, García Segovia, P & Martínez Monzó, J (2011) Paper and pencil vs online self-administered food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) applied to university population: a pilot study. Nutr Hosp 26, 13781384.
44. Beasley, JM, Davis, A & Riley, WT (2009) Evaluation of a web-based, pictorial diet history questionnaire. Public Health Nutr 12, 651659.
45. Vereecken, CA, De Bourdeaudhuij, I & Maes, L (2010) The HELENA online food frequency questionnaire: reproducibility and comparison with four 24-h recalls in Belgian-Flemish adolescents. Eur J Clin Nutr 64, 541548.
46. Beasley, J, Riley, W & Jean-Mary, J (2005) Accuracy of a PDA-based dietary assessment program. Nutrition 21, 672677.
47. Yon, BA, Johnson, RK, Harvey-Berino, J et al. (2007) Personal digital assistants are comparable to traditional diaries for dietary self-monitoring during a weight loss program. J Behav Med 30, 165175.
48. Fukuo, W, Yoshiuchi, K, Ohashi, K et al. (2009) Development of a hand-held personal digital assistant-based food diary with food photographs for Japanese subjects. J Am Diet Assoc 109, 12321236.
49. Sharp, DB & Allman-Farinelli, M (2014) Feasibility and validity of mobile phones to assess dietary intake. Nutrition 30, 12571266.
50. Weiss, R, Stumbo, PJ & Divakaran, A (2010) Automatic food documentation and volume computation using digital imaging and electronic transmission. J Am Diet Assoc 110, 4244.
51. Free, C, Phillips, G, Galli, L et al. (2013) The effectiveness of mobile-health technology-based health behaviour change or disease management interventions for health care consumers: a systematic review. PLoS Med 10, e1001362.
52. Kong, F & Tan, J (2012) DietCam: automatic dietary assessment with mobile camera phones. Pervasive Mob. Comput. 8, 147163.
53. Nielsen (2013) The Mobile Consumer. A Global Snapshot. http://www.nielsen.com/content/dam/corporate/uk/en/documents/Mobile-Consumer-Report-2013.pdf (accessed March 2015).
54. Jospe, MR, Fairbairn, KA, Green, P et al. (2015) Diet app use by sports dietitians: a survey in five countries. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 3, e7.
55. Turner-McGrievy, GM, Beets, MW, Moore, JB et al. (2013) Comparison of traditional versus mobile app self-monitoring of physical activity and dietary intake among overweight adults participating in an mHealth weight loss program. J Am Med Inf Assoc 20, 513518.
56. Gemming, L, Utter, J & Ni Mhurchu, C (2015) Image-assisted dietary assessment: a systematic review of the evidence. J Acad Nutr Diet 115, 6477.
57. Khanna, N, Boushey, CJ, Kerr, D et al. (2010) An Overview of The Technology Assisted Dietary Assessment Project at Purdue University. Proceedings of the IEEE Int. Symp. on Multimedia, pp. 290–295.
58. Martin, CK, Nicklas, T, Gunturk, B et al. (2014) Measuring food intake with digital photography. J Hum Nutr Diet 27, S72S81.
59. Martin, CK, Correa, JB, Han, H et al. (2012) Validity of the Remote Food Photography Method (RFPM) for estimating energy and nutrient intake in near real-time. Obesity 20, 891899.
60. Zhu, F, Bosch, M, Woo, I et al. (2010) The use of mobile devices in aiding dietary assessment and evaluation. IEEE J Sel Top Signal Process 4, 756766.
61. O'Loughlin, G, Cullen, SJ, McGoldrick, A et al. (2013) Using a wearable camera to increase the accuracy of dietary analysis. Am J Prev Med 44, 297301.
62. Sternfeld, B, Block, C, Quesenberry, CP et al. (2009) Improving diet and physical activity with ALIVE: a worksite randomized trial. Am J Prev Med 36, 475483.
63. Ambeba, EJ, Ye, L, Sereika, SM et al. (2015) The use of mHealth to deliver tailored messages reduces reported energy and fat intake. J Cardiovasc Nurs 30, 3543.
64. Maes, L, Cook, TL, Ottovaere, C et al. (2011) Pilot evaluation of the HELENA (Healthy Lifestyle in Europe by Nutrition in Adolescence) Food-O-Meter, a computer-tailored nutrition advice for adolescents: a study in six European cities. Public Health Nutr 14, 12921302.
65. Kroeze, W, Oenema, A, Campbell, M et al. (2008) The efficacy of Web-based and print-delivered computer-tailored interventions to reduce fat intake: results of a randomized, controlled trial. J Nutr Educ Behav 40, 226236.
66. Oenema, A, Tan, F & Brug, J (2005) Short-term efficacy of a web-based computer-tailored nutrition intervention: main effects and mediators. Ann Behav Med 29, 5463.
67. Kroeze, W, Oenema, A, Dagnelie, PC et al. (2008) Examining the minimal required elements of a computer-tailored intervention aimed at dietary fat reduction: results of a randomized controlled dismantling study. Health Educ Res 23, 880891.
68. Brug, J (1999) Dutch research into the development and impact of computer-tailored nutrition education. Eur J Clin Nutr 53, S78S82.
69. Harris, J, Felix, L, Miners, A et al. (2011) Adaptive e-learning to improve dietary behaviour: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Technol Assess 15, 1160.
70. Capacci, S, Mazzocchi, M, Shankar, B et al. (2012) Policies to promote healthy eating in Europe: a structured review of policies and their effectiveness. Nutr Rev 70, 188200.
71. Noar, S, Harrington, N, Van Stee, S et al. (2011) Tailored health communication to change lifestyle behaviours. Am. J. Lifestyle Med 5, 112122.
72. Block, G, Sternfeld, B, Block, CH et al. (2008) Development of Alive! (A Lifestyle Intervention Via Email), and its effect on health-related quality of life, presenteeism, and other behavioral outcomes: randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res 10, e43.
73. Brug, J & van Assema, P (2000) Differences in use and impact of computer-tailored dietary fat-feedback according to stage of change and education. Appetite 34, 285293.
74. Celis-Morales, C, Lara, J & Mathers, JC (2014) Personalising nutritional guidance for more effective behaviour change. Proc Nutr Soc 12, 19.
75. Patrick, K, Calfas, KJ, Norman, GJ et al. (2011) Outcomes of a 12-month web-based intervention for overweight and obese men. Ann Behav Med 42, 391401.
76. Tate, DF, Jackvony, EH & Wing, RR (2006) A randomized trial comparing human e-mail counseling, computer-automated tailored counseling, and no counseling in an Internet weight loss program. Arch Intern Med 166, 16201625.