Skip to main content
. 2012 Apr 13;14(2):e58. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1967

Table 3.

Comparisons between and within adolescents and adults of the number of images acquired prior to obtaining a suitable image.

Group Adolescents
(n = 63 meal session 1,
n = 55 meal session 2)
Adults
(n = 56a meal session 1,
n = 24 meal session 2)
1 image,
n (%)
>1 image,
n (%)
Data recording
errorb, n
1 image,
n (%)
>1 image,
n (%)
Data recording
errorb, n
All participants
Meal session 1
Before imagec,d 38 (62%) 23 (38%) 2 21 (42%) 29 (58%) 6
After imagec,e 44 (75%) 15 (25%) 4 25 (50%) 25 (50%) 6
Meal session 2
Before image 39 (77%) 12 (24%) 4 13 (59%) 9 (41%) 2
After image 40 (78%) 11 (22%) 4 16 (73%) 6 (27%) 0
Matched participantsf
Meal session 1
Before image 28 (58%) 20 (42%)g,h NAi 9 (45%) 11 (55%) NA
After imagec,j 36 (75%) 12 (25%) NA 7 (35%) 13 (65%) NA
Meal session 2
Before image 38 (79%) 10 (21%)g,h NA 12 (60%) 8 (40%) NA
After image 37 (77%) 11 (23%) NA 14 (70%) 6 (30%) NA

a Due to software programming errors, n = 56 instead of 57.

b Data recording error on the part of staff; therefore, numbers not included in percentages, which represent only users’ abilities.

c Comparison between adolescents and adults.

d P = .03.

e P = .008.

f Number of before and after meal images these participants took was recorded for both meal session 1 and meal session 2 (n = 48 session pairs for adolescents; n = 20 session pairs for adults).

g Comparison between meal session 1 (before) and meal session 2 (before) within adolescents.

h P = .04

i Not applicable.

j P = .002.