ReviewAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2026
Digital and Technology-Enabled Approaches in Dietary Assessment: Addressing Bias, Error, and Feasibility in Population- and Community-Based Research.
Review in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Dietary fiber density and incident gross motor limitation among middle-aged and older adults: a prospective cohort analysis.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dietary intake data are essential for understanding diet-disease relationships, informing policy, and evaluating nutrition interventions. This is particularly challenging in population- and community-based research, where varying dietary patterns, motivation to participate, and practical constraints limit the feasibility of highly controlled dietary assessment methods. Advances in digital tools, including web- and smartphone-based assessment, image- and speech-based methods, wearable sensors, and artificial intelligence are transforming how dietary data are collected, processed, and analyzed. This narrative review examines how digital and technology-enabled approaches impact key sources of bias and error throughout the stages of dietary assessment, from sample selection and participant reporting to food classification and nutrient composition assignment. We also assess the feasibility of implementing these approaches in large-scale research settings by considering resource requirements, respondent burden, and scalability. Evidence supporting these technologies varies considerably across applications, populations, and settings, and relatively few approaches have been evaluated in large-scale or low-resource research contexts. Although many technologies can reduce specific sources of bias and measurement error, they may also introduce new challenges, such as selection bias and higher development or implementation costs. These trade-offs are especially pronounced in large and heterogeneous study populations. Constraints related to connectivity, device access, and technical capacity may further limit implementation in low-resource settings. While technological innovations offer significant opportunities to improve dietary assessment, selecting the appropriate assessment method requires careful consideration of the trade-offs between accuracy and feasibility in the intended research context.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.