Table 8.

Comparison with glasses-based eating and chewing monitoring systems.

Study	Goal	Sensors	Participants, n	Setup	Performance
Bedri et al [13], 2020	Eating and drinking	IMUa, proximity, and camera	18 (laboratory) and 5 (real-world)	Laboratory and real world	F1-score: 0.89
Shin et al [14], 2022	Eating	Piezoelectric and IMU	30	Real-world	F1-score: 0.92
Bello et al [15], 2023	Facial expressions and eating and drinking	IMU, pressure, microphone, force, and piezoelectric	10	Real-world	F1-score: 0.86 (expressions); 0.94 (eating or drinking)
Farooq and Sazonov [16], 2016	Eating and physical activity	Piezoelectric and IMU	10	Laboratory	F1-score: 99% (eating vs activity)
Chung et al [17], 2017	Chewing and 5 other activities	Load cells	10	Laboratory	F1-score: 94%
Zhang and Amft [18], 2018	Chewing and eating	EMGb sensors	10	Laboratory and real-world	Precision or recall: 95% (laboratory) and 78% (real-world)
This study	Chewing and eating	OCO optical sensors	128 (laboratory) and 8 (real-world)	Laboratory and real-world	F1-score: 0.91 (laboratory) and 0.88 (real-world)

^aIMU: inertial measurement unit.

^bEMG: electromyography.