TY - JOUR
T1 - An assessment of the validity of the remote food photography method (termed Snap-N-Send) in experienced and inexperienced sport nutritionists
AU - Stables, Reuben
AU - Kasper, Andreas
AU - Sparks, Andy
AU - Morton, James
AU - Close, Graeme
PY - 2021/1/20
Y1 - 2021/1/20
N2 - The remote food photography method (RFPM), often referred to as ‘Snap-N-Send’ by sport nutritionists, has been reported as a valid method to assess energy intake in athletic populations. However, preliminary studies were not conducted in true free-living conditions and dietary assessment was performed by one researcher only. We therefore assessed the validity of ‘Snap-N-Send’ to assess energy and macronutrient composition in experienced (EXP, n=23) and inexperienced (INEXP, n=25) sport nutritionists. Participants analysed two days of dietary photographs, comprising eight meals. Day 1 consisted of ‘simple’ meals based around easily distinguishable foods (i.e. chicken breast and rice) and Day 2, ‘complex’ meals containing ‘hidden’ ingredients (i.e. chicken curry). Estimates of dietary intake were analysed for validity using one-sample t-tests and typical error of estimates (TEE). INEXP and EXP nutritionists underestimated energy intake for the simple day (Mean difference, MD = -1.5 MJ, TEE = 10.1%; -1.2 MJ, TEE = 9.3% respectively) and the complex day (MD = -1.2 MJ, TEE = 17.8%; MD = -0.6 MJ, 14.3% respectively). Carbohydrate intake was underestimated by INEXP (MD = -65.5 g.day-1, TEE = 10.8% and MD = -28.7 g.day-1, TEE = 24.4%) and EXP (MD = -53.4 g.day-1, TEE = 10.1% and -19.9 g.day-1, TEE = 17.5%) for both simple and complex days, respectively. The inter-practitioner reliability was generally ‘poor’ for energy and macro-nutrients. Data demonstrate that the RFPM / ‘Snap-N-Send’ under-estimates energy intake in simple and complex meals and these errors are evident in experienced and inexperienced sport nutritionists.
AB - The remote food photography method (RFPM), often referred to as ‘Snap-N-Send’ by sport nutritionists, has been reported as a valid method to assess energy intake in athletic populations. However, preliminary studies were not conducted in true free-living conditions and dietary assessment was performed by one researcher only. We therefore assessed the validity of ‘Snap-N-Send’ to assess energy and macronutrient composition in experienced (EXP, n=23) and inexperienced (INEXP, n=25) sport nutritionists. Participants analysed two days of dietary photographs, comprising eight meals. Day 1 consisted of ‘simple’ meals based around easily distinguishable foods (i.e. chicken breast and rice) and Day 2, ‘complex’ meals containing ‘hidden’ ingredients (i.e. chicken curry). Estimates of dietary intake were analysed for validity using one-sample t-tests and typical error of estimates (TEE). INEXP and EXP nutritionists underestimated energy intake for the simple day (Mean difference, MD = -1.5 MJ, TEE = 10.1%; -1.2 MJ, TEE = 9.3% respectively) and the complex day (MD = -1.2 MJ, TEE = 17.8%; MD = -0.6 MJ, 14.3% respectively). Carbohydrate intake was underestimated by INEXP (MD = -65.5 g.day-1, TEE = 10.8% and MD = -28.7 g.day-1, TEE = 24.4%) and EXP (MD = -53.4 g.day-1, TEE = 10.1% and -19.9 g.day-1, TEE = 17.5%) for both simple and complex days, respectively. The inter-practitioner reliability was generally ‘poor’ for energy and macro-nutrients. Data demonstrate that the RFPM / ‘Snap-N-Send’ under-estimates energy intake in simple and complex meals and these errors are evident in experienced and inexperienced sport nutritionists.
KW - dietary intake
KW - exercise
KW - RED-S
KW - LEA
U2 - 10.1123/ijsnem.2020-0216
DO - 10.1123/ijsnem.2020-0216
M3 - Article (journal)
C2 - 33477111
SP - 1
EP - 10
JO - International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
JF - International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
SN - 1526-484X
ER -