Hostname: page-component-699b5d5946-nm5pm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-02-28T19:12:23.743Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
Accepted manuscript

Examining the development of automated, personalised, dietary feedback using digital technologies: A systematic review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 February 2026

Samara Legrand*
Affiliation:
Department of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Notting Hill 3168, Australia
Heidi Ng
Affiliation:
Department of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Notting Hill 3168, Australia
Eva L. Jenkins
Affiliation:
Department of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Notting Hill 3168, Australia
Aimee L. Dordevic
Affiliation:
Department of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Notting Hill 3168, Australia
Kentaro Murakami
Affiliation:
Department of Social and Preventive Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan
Nana Shinozaki
Affiliation:
Department of Social and Preventive Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan
Hoan M.T. Dang
Affiliation:
Department of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Notting Hill 3168, Australia
Maxine Bonham
Affiliation:
Department of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Notting Hill 3168, Australia
Tracy A. McCaffrey*
Affiliation:
Department of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Notting Hill 3168, Australia
*
*Corresponding authors: Samara Legrand (PhD Candidate) and Tracy McCaffrey (Associate Professor) Monash Digital Nutrition Lab, Department of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Be Active Sleep Eat (BASE) Facility, School of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Level 1, 264 Ferntree Gully Road, Notting Hill, VIC 3168 Australia samara.legrand@monash.edu, tracy.mccaffrey@monash.edu 61 (0) 3 9905 6862
*Corresponding authors: Samara Legrand (PhD Candidate) and Tracy McCaffrey (Associate Professor) Monash Digital Nutrition Lab, Department of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Be Active Sleep Eat (BASE) Facility, School of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Level 1, 264 Ferntree Gully Road, Notting Hill, VIC 3168 Australia samara.legrand@monash.edu, tracy.mccaffrey@monash.edu 61 (0) 3 9905 6862
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Digital technologies provide a convenient and scalable approach to dietary assessment and personalised feedback, facilitating behaviour change. This is essential for reducing the prevalence of non-communicable diseases at a population level. However, the evaluation of the acceptability and feasibility of dietary feedback delivered via online platforms has not been thoroughly investigated. By utilising the term ‘system architecture’ to describe the essential components of the digital approach to capturing dietary feedback, this systematic review outlines the platform, dietary assessment methodology, reference values for assessing dietary intake, and elements of personalised dietary feedback. When reported, the acceptability and feasibility of personalised feedback were captured. OVID Medline, OVID Embase, Scopus via Elsevier, and Cinahl Plus via EBSCO identified 5,839 studies. Search terms included dietary assessment, feedback, and digital technologies. In total, 28 studies involving 301,271 participants were included. Food frequency questionnaires were the most commonly used dietary assessment method, accessed via web-based platforms. Dietary intake was commonly assessed using a diet quality index, and feedback was provided on food groups, often combined with a diet quality score or macronutrient analysis. While participant acceptance of personalised dietary feedback was generally high, the overall completion rates for acceptability questionnaires were low, and feasibility was seldom reported. Methods used to measure acceptability and feasibility varied, preventing comparisons across studies. Study quality was high; however, future research would benefit from the involvement of stakeholders and end-users in designing feedback messages.

Information

Type
Review Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Nutrition Society