@Article{信息:doi 10.2196 / / jmir。3744，作者=“Raatz, Susan K和Scheett, Angela J和Johnson, LuAnn K和Jahns, Lisa”，标题=“与营养师分析饮食记录相比，电子饮食记录营养估计的有效性:随机对照试验”，期刊=“J医学互联网研究”，年=“2015”，月=“Jan”，日=“20”，卷=“17”，数=“1”，页=“e21”，关键词=“饮食记录;营养评估;背景:膳食摄入评估与饮食记录(DR)是一种标准的研究和实践工具。手动输入和分析DR既耗时又昂贵。客户和研究参与者用于饮食输入的新电子工具可能会减少营养摄入估计的成本和工作量。目的:为了确定电子饮食记录的有效性，我们比较了苹果iPod Touch上的Tap Track软件保存的3天DR和Nutrihand网站上保存的记录，以及由研究营养师编码和分析的DR，并将其纳入定制的美国农业部(USDA)营养分析程序，名为GRAND(大叉子营养数据研究分析)。方法:成年参与者(n=19)参加了一项交叉设计的临床试验。在两个洗脱期的每一个期间，参与者都保留了一份书面的3天DR.此外，他们被随机分配在基于网络的饮食分析程序(Nutrihand)或手持电子设备(Tap {\&} Track)中输入他们的DR。在第二次洗脱期间，他们完成了额外的3天DR和替代的电子饮食记录方法。 Entries resulted in 228 daily diet records or 12 for each of 19 participants. Means of nutrient intake were calculated for each method. Concordance of the intake estimates were determined by Bland-Altman plots. Coefficients of determination (R2) were calculated for each comparison to assess the strength of the linear relationship between methods. Results: No significant differences were observed between the mean nutrient values for energy, carbohydrate, protein, fat, saturated fatty acids, total fiber, or sodium between the recorded DR analyzed in GRAND and either Nutrihand or Tap {\&} Track, or for total sugars comparing GRAND and Tap {\&} Track. Reported values for total sugars were significantly reduced (P<.05) comparing Nutrihand to GRAND. Coefficients of determination (R2) for Nutrihand and Tap {\&} Track compared to DR entries into GRAND, respectively, were energy .56, .01; carbohydrate .58, .08; total fiber .65, .37; sugar .78, .41; protein .44, .03; fat .36, .03; saturated fatty acids .23, .03; sodium .20, .00; and for Nutrihand only for cholesterol .88; vitamin A .02; vitamin C .37; calcium .05; and iron .77. Bland-Altman analysis demonstrates high variability in individual responses for both electronic capture programs with higher 95{\%} limits of agreement for dietary intake recorded on Tap {\&} Track. Conclusions: In comparison to dietitian-entered 3-day DR, electronic methods resulted in no significant difference in mean nutrient estimates but exhibited larger variability, particularly the Tap {\&} Track program. However, electronic DR provided mean estimates of energy, macronutrients, and some micronutrients, which approximated those of the dietitian-analyzed DR and may be appropriate for dietary monitoring of groups. Electronic diet assessment methods have the potential to reduce the cost and burden of DR analysis for nutrition research and clinical practice. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01183520; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01183520 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6VSdYznKX). ", issn="1438-8871", doi="10.2196/jmir.3744", url="//www.mybigtv.com/2015/1/e21/", url="https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.3744", url="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25604640" }