BACKGROUND: Diet is a critical element of diabetes self-management. An emerging area of research is the use of images for dietary records using mobile telephones with embedded cameras. These tools are being designed to reduce user burden and to improve accuracy of portion-size estimation through automation. The objectives of this study were to (1) assess the error of automatically determined portion weights compared to known portion weights of foods and (2) to compare the error between automation and human. METHODS: Adolescents (n = 15) captured images of their eating occasions over a 24 h period. All foods and beverages served were weighed. Adolescents self-reported portion sizes for one meal. Image analysis was used to estimate portion weights. Data analysis compared known weights, automated weights, and self-reported portions. RESULTS: For the 19 foods, the mean ratio of automated weight estimate to known weight ranged from 0.89 to 4.61, and 9 foods were within 0.80 to 1.20. The largest error was for lettuce and the most accurate was strawberry jam. The children were fairly accurate with portion estimates for two foods (sausage links, toast) using one type of estimation aid and two foods (sausage links, scrambled eggs) using another aid. The automated method was fairly accurate for two foods (sausage links, jam); however, the 95% confidence intervals for the automated estimates were consistently narrower than human estimates. CONCLUSIONS: The ability of humans to estimate portion sizes of foods remains a problem and a perceived burden. Errors in automated portion-size estimation can be systematically addressed while minimizing the burden on people. Future applications that take over the burden of these processes may translate to better diabetes self-management.
BACKGROUND: Diet is a critical element of diabetes self-management. An emerging area of research is the use of images for dietary records using mobile telephones with embedded cameras. These tools are being designed to reduce user burden and to improve accuracy of portion-size estimation through automation. The objectives of this study were to (1) assess the error of automatically determined portion weights compared to known portion weights of foods and (2) to compare the error between automation and human. METHODS: Adolescents (n = 15) captured images of their eating occasions over a 24 h period. All foods and beverages served were weighed. Adolescents self-reported portion sizes for one meal. Image analysis was used to estimate portion weights. Data analysis compared known weights, automated weights, and self-reported portions. RESULTS: For the 19 foods, the mean ratio of automated weight estimate to known weight ranged from 0.89 to 4.61, and 9 foods were within 0.80 to 1.20. The largest error was for lettuce and the most accurate was strawberryjam. The children were fairly accurate with portion estimates for two foods (sausage links, toast) using one type of estimation aid and two foods (sausage links, scrambled eggs) using another aid. The automated method was fairly accurate for two foods (sausage links, jam); however, the 95% confidence intervals for the automated estimates were consistently narrower than human estimates. CONCLUSIONS: The ability of humans to estimate portion sizes of foods remains a problem and a perceived burden. Errors in automated portion-size estimation can be systematically addressed while minimizing the burden on people. Future applications that take over the burden of these processes may translate to better diabetes self-management.
Authors: J Keith Jensen; Deborah Gustafson; Carol J Boushey; Garry Auld; Margaret Ann Bock; Christine M Bruhn; Kathe Gabel; Scottie Misner; Rachel Novotny; Louise Peck; Marsha Read Journal: J Am Diet Assoc Date: 2004-05
Authors: Chandra L Jackson; Shari Bolen; Frederick L Brancati; Marian L Batts-Turner; Tiffany L Gary Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2005-12-22 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Sungye Kim; Tusarebecca Schap; Marc Bosch; Ross Maciejewski; Edward J Delp; David S Ebert; Carol J Boushey Journal: MUM Int Conf Mob Ubiquitous Multimed Date: 2010-12-31
Authors: Trevor J Orchard; Marinella Temprosa; Ronald Goldberg; Steven Haffner; Robert Ratner; Santica Marcovina; Sarah Fowler Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2005-04-19 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Fengqing Zhu; Marc Bosch; Insoo Woo; Sungye Kim; Carol J Boushey; David S Ebert; Edward J Delp Journal: IEEE J Sel Top Signal Process Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 6.856
Authors: Davis Bu; Eric Pan; Janice Walker; Julia Adler-Milstein; David Kendrick; Julie M Hook; Caitlin M Cusack; David W Bates; Blackford Middleton Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2007-02-23 Impact factor: 19.112