Melanie Hingle

Dr. Melanie Hingle

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

19Years (2008-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
16 November 2018 in Journal of Medical Internet Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
CSCamille Short
Camille Short
ADAnn DeSmet  
Ann DeSmet  
CWCatherine Woods
Catherine Woods
SWSusan Williams
Susan Williams
CMCarol Maher
Carol Maher
RCRik Crutzen
Rik Crutzen
Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet

1 August 2010 in Preventive Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MHMelanie Hingle
Melanie Hingle
TOTeresia M. O'Connor
Teresia M. O'Connor
JDJayna M. Dave
Jayna M. Dave
TBTom Baranowski
Tom Baranowski

18 April 2018 in Journal of Medical Internet Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
AMAndre Müller
Andre Müller
CMCarol A Maher
Carol A Maher
Corneel VandelanotteCorneel Vandelanotte
Corneel Vandelanotte
MHMelanie Hingle
Melanie Hingle
AMAnouk Middelweerd
Anouk Middelweerd
PWPetra Wark
Petra Wark
Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet

12 January 2015 in Pediatric Obesity
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
TTT. Turner
T. Turner
DSDonna Spruijt-Metz
Donna Spruijt-Metz
CWCheng K. Fred Wen
Cheng K. Fred Wen
MHMelanie Hingle
Melanie Hingle

1 March 2016 in Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MHMelanie Hingle
Melanie Hingle
HPHeather Patrick
Heather Patrick

20 November 2018 in JMIR mHealth and uHealth
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
SSSusan M Schembre
Susan M Schembre
Yue LiaoYue Liao
Yue Liao
SOSydney G O'Connor
Sydney G O'Connor
MHMelanie Hingle
Melanie Hingle
SSShu-En Shen
Shu-En Shen
CBCarol Boushey
Carol Boushey
Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet #Preprint #PeerReviewMe: Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint. Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn. Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period. Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author). Background: New methods for assessing diet in research are being developed to address the limitations of traditional dietary assessment methods. Mobile device–assisted ecological momentary diet assessment (mEMDA) is a new dietary assessment method that has not yet been optimized and has the potential to minimize recall biases and participant burden while maximizing ecological validity. There have been limited efforts to characterize the use of mEMDA in behavioral research settings. Objective: The aims of this study were to summarize mEMDA protocols used in research to date, to characterize key aspects of these assessment approaches, and to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of mEMDA compared with the traditional dietary assessment methods as well as implications for future mEMDA research. Methods: Studies that used mobile devices and described mEMDA protocols to assess dietary intake were included. Data were extracted according to Preferred Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Cochrane guidelines and then synthesized narratively. Results: The review included 20 studies with unique mEMDA protocols. Of these, 50% (10/20) used participant-initiated reports of intake at eating events (event-contingent mEMDA), and 50% (10/20) used researcher-initiated prompts requesting that participants report recent dietary intake (signal-contingent mEMDA). A majority of the study protocols (60%, 12/20) enabled participants to use mobile phones to report dietary data. Event-contingent mEMDA protocols most commonly assessed diet in real time, used dietary records for data collection (60%, 6/10), and provided estimates of energy and nutrient intake (60%, 6/10). All signal-contingent mEMDA protocols used a near real-time recall approach with unannounced (ie, random) abbreviated diet surveys. Most signal-contingent protocols (70%, 7/10) assessed the frequency with which (targeted) foods or food groups were consumed. Relatively few (30%, 6/20) studies compared mEMDA with the traditional dietary assessment methods. Conclusions: This review demonstrates that mEMDA has the potential to reduce participant burden and recall bias, thus advancing the field beyond current dietary assessment methods while maximizing ecological validity.