↓ Skip to main content

A review of the design and validation of web- and computer-based 24-h dietary recall tools

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition Research Reviews, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A review of the design and validation of web- and computer-based 24-h dietary recall tools
Published in
Nutrition Research Reviews, December 2016
DOI 10.1017/s0954422416000172
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claire M. Timon, Rinske van den Barg, Richard J. Blain, Laura Kehoe, Katie Evans, Janette Walton, Albert Flynn, Eileen R. Gibney

Abstract

Technology-based dietary assessment offers solutions to many of the limitations of traditional dietary assessment methodologies including cost, participation rates and the accuracy of data collected. The 24-h dietary recall (24HDR) method is currently the most utilised method for the collection of dietary intake data at a national level. Recently there have been many developments using web-based platforms to collect food intake data using the principles of the 24HDR method. This review identifies web- and computer-based 24HDR tools that have been developed for both children and adult population groups, and examines common design features and the methods used to investigate the performance and validity of these tools. Overall, there is generally good to strong agreement between web-based 24HDR and respective reference measures for intakes of macro- and micronutrients.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 115 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 20%
Researcher 22 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 16%
Student > Bachelor 13 11%
Lecturer 5 4%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 18 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 8%
Sports and Recreations 6 5%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 32 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 January 2017.
All research outputs
#10,017,219
of 12,518,238 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Research Reviews
#216
of 245 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,216
of 362,523 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Research Reviews
#7
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,518,238 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 245 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.6. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 362,523 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.