BACKGROUND: Current methods of self-monitoring kilocalorie intake outside of laboratory/clinical settings suffer from a systematic underreporting bias. Recent efforts to make kilocalorie information available have improved these methods somewhat, but it may be possible to derive an objective and more accurate measure of kilocalorie intake from bite count. OBJECTIVE: This study sought to develop and examine the accuracy of an individualized bite-based measure of kilocalorie intake and to compare that measure to participant estimates of kilocalorie intake. It was hypothesized that kilocalorie information would improve human estimates of kilocalorie intake over those with no information, but a bite-based estimate of kilocalorie intake would still outperform human estimates. PARTICIPANTS/SETTINGS: Two-hundred eighty participants were allowed to eat ad libitum in a cafeteria setting. Their bite count and kilocalorie intake were measured. After completion of the meal, participants estimated how many kilocalories they consumed, some with the aid of a menu containing kilocalorie information and some without. Using a train and test method for predictive model development, participants were randomly divided into one of two groups: one for model development (training group) and one for model validation (test group). STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Multiple regression was used to determine whether height, weight, age, sex, and waist-to-hip ratio could predict an individual's mean kilocalories per bite for the training sample. The model was then validated with the test group, and the model-predicted kilocalorie intake was compared with human-estimated kilocalorie intake. RESULTS: Only age and sex significantly predicted mean kilocalories per bite, but all variables were retained for the test group. The bite-based measure of kilocalorie intake outperformed human estimates with and without kilocalorie information. CONCLUSIONS: Bite count might serve as an easily measured, objective proxy for kilocalorie intake. A tool that can monitor bite count may be a powerful assistant to self-monitoring.
BACKGROUND: Current methods of self-monitoring kilocalorie intake outside of laboratory/clinical settings suffer from a systematic underreporting bias. Recent efforts to make kilocalorie information available have improved these methods somewhat, but it may be possible to derive an objective and more accurate measure of kilocalorie intake from bite count. OBJECTIVE: This study sought to develop and examine the accuracy of an individualized bite-based measure of kilocalorie intake and to compare that measure to participant estimates of kilocalorie intake. It was hypothesized that kilocalorie information would improve human estimates of kilocalorie intake over those with no information, but a bite-based estimate of kilocalorie intake would still outperform human estimates. PARTICIPANTS/SETTINGS: Two-hundred eighty participants were allowed to eat ad libitum in a cafeteria setting. Their bite count and kilocalorie intake were measured. After completion of the meal, participants estimated how many kilocalories they consumed, some with the aid of a menu containing kilocalorie information and some without. Using a train and test method for predictive model development, participants were randomly divided into one of two groups: one for model development (training group) and one for model validation (test group). STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Multiple regression was used to determine whether height, weight, age, sex, and waist-to-hip ratio could predict an individual's mean kilocalories per bite for the training sample. The model was then validated with the test group, and the model-predicted kilocalorie intake was compared with human-estimated kilocalorie intake. RESULTS: Only age and sex significantly predicted mean kilocalories per bite, but all variables were retained for the test group. The bite-based measure of kilocalorie intake outperformed human estimates with and without kilocalorie information. CONCLUSIONS: Bite count might serve as an easily measured, objective proxy for kilocalorie intake. A tool that can monitor bite count may be a powerful assistant to self-monitoring.
Authors: Amy H Auchincloss; Giridhar G Mallya; Beth L Leonberg; Andrew Ricchezza; Karen Glanz; Donald F Schwarz Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Dale A Schoeller; Diana Thomas; Edward Archer; Steven B Heymsfield; Steven N Blair; Michael I Goran; James O Hill; Richard L Atkinson; Barbara E Corkey; John Foreyt; Nikhil V Dhurandhar; John G Kral; Kevin D Hall; Barbara C Hansen; Berit Lilienthal Heitmann; Eric Ravussin; David B Allison Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2013-06 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Juan M Fontana; Janine A Higgins; Stephanie C Schuckers; France Bellisle; Zhaoxing Pan; Edward L Melanson; Michael R Neuman; Edward Sazonov Journal: Appetite Date: 2014-11-07 Impact factor: 3.868
Authors: Sai Krupa Das; Akari J Miki; Caroline M Blanchard; Edward Sazonov; Cheryl H Gilhooly; Sujit Dey; Colton B Wolk; Chor San H Khoo; James O Hill; Robin P Shook Journal: Adv Nutr Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 11.567
Authors: Andrew W Brown; Stella Aslibekyan; Dennis Bier; Rafael Ferreira da Silva; Adam Hoover; David M Klurfeld; Eric Loken; Evan Mayo-Wilson; Nir Menachemi; Greg Pavela; Dale Schoeller; Colby J Vorland; Leah D Whigham; David B Allison Journal: Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr Date: 2021-10-22 Impact factor: 11.208