The Universal Eating Monitor (UEM): objective assessment of food intake behavior in the laboratory setting

Abstract

The Universal Eating Monitor was a term used to describe a device used in a laboratory setting that enabled investigators to measure, with the same instrument, the rate of eating either solids or liquids, hence the term “universal”. It consisted of an electronic balance placed in a false panel under a table cloth on which could be placed a food reservoir that contained either solid or liquefied food. The device was created in order to determine whether rates of eating differed in pattern between solid and liquid foods. An acceptable mixture of foods of identical composition that could be served as either solid or blended as a liquid was used to test the hypothesis that eating rate and intake were affected by physical composition. A best-fitting mathematical function (intake was quadratic function of time, with coefficients varying among foods used and experimental conditions), quantified intake rates. The device was used to test a variety of mechanisms underlying food intake control. Eating rates were linear when solid foods were used, but negatively accelerated with liquids. Overall, intake did not differ between solid and liquefied food of identical composition. Satiation on a calorie for calorie basis was different among foods, but physical composition interacted with energy density. Hormones and gastric distension were strong influences on food intake and rate of eating. Individuals with bulimia nervosa and binge eating disorder ate more than individuals without these disturbances. Intake in social and individual contexts was identical, but the rate of eating was slower when two individuals dined together. The eating monitor has been a useful instrument for elucidating controls of food intake and describing eating pathology.

Potential Mechanisms of Precision Nutrition-Based Interventions for Managing Obesity

“…The integration of psychosocial characteristics into the field of precision medicine serves to acknowledge the importance of psychological behavior and socioeconomic factors on the delivery and efficacy of precision dietary interventions but requires much additional study in children and adolescents [ 111 ]. Importantly, improved assessment of these considerations may now be feasible with recent technological advances, including the Universal Eating Monitor [ 112 ] and Automatic Ingestion Monitor [ 113 ], which use standardized methods to assess rates of food consumption, temporal eating patterns, and daily habits. Integrating these novel and standardized assessments of eating patterns and behaviors can provide an additional level of precision for dietary interventions that may then integrate this information to optimize responses to dietary and behavioral interventions.…”

Technology to Automatically Record Eating Behavior in Real Life: A Systematic Review

“…[They] emphasize the application of technology and sensor-based solutions to the health-monitoring domain, and [they] evaluate various form factors to provide a comprehensive survey of the prior art in the field. [ 157 ] 2022 The original ultimate goal of the studies reviewed in this paper was to use the laboratory test meal, measured with the UEM [universal eating monitor] , to translate animal models of ingestion to humans for the study of the physiological controls of food intake under standardized conditions. [ 158 ] 2022 This paper describes many food weight detection systems which includes sensor systems consisting of a load cell, manual food waste method, wearable sensors.…”

Validation of computational models to characterize cumulative intake curves from video-coded meals

“…First, behavioral protocols required to continuously measure food weight during eating may be difficult for children to follow (e.g., not touching the plate) and restrict typical eating behaviors (e.g., playing with food). Second, it is uncommon to use multi-item meals with Universal Eating Monitors ( 14 , 15 ) and the “drinkometer” requires the use of liquid meals ( 8 ). This limits the utility of these protocols in studies with children, where the standard is to serve multi-item meals ( 2 ).…”