Artificial intelligence diet plans underestimate nutrient intake compared to dietitians in adolescents

Objective Although artificial intelligence (AI)-based nutrition recommendations are becoming increasingly common among the public, the accuracy and reliability of diets produced especially for adolescents in the growth and development period are not sufficiently known. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical validity of AI by comparing the nutritional content of diets generated by different AI models with dietitian reference plans. Methods A total of 60 three-day diet plans were generated in two sessions by five AI models (ChatGPT-4o, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Claude 4.1, Bing Chat-5GPT, and Perplexity) for four standardized adolescent profiles in this cross-sectional and comparative study. A dietitian reference plan was prepared for each profile. Energy and macro-micronutrients were analyzed with BeBiS. Comparisons were evaluated with single-sample t -test, Cohen’s d, and Bland–Altman fit analyses. Results AI models tended to systematically undercalculate energy (bias: +695 kcal), protein (+19.9 g), lipid (+15.8 g), and carbohydrate (+114.6 g). In macronutrient percentages, protein (21.5–23.7%) and lipid (41.5–44.5%) ratios were above the recommended adolescent guidelines, while carbohydrate ratios (32.4–36.3%) were significantly below. Significant variation was observed between models in micronutrient contents, and no model showed consistent proximity to the dietitian across all nutrients. Conclusion AI models have exhibited clinically significant deviations in diet plans for adolescents at both macro and micro levels. The findings indicate that AI-based dietary recommendations are not appropriate to use without professional supervision, emphasizing the need for model improvements for more reliable data generation in this area.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Frontiers in Nutrition
Published
2026-03-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2026.1765598
Primary Topic
Nutritional Studies and Diet
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Artificial intelligence diet plans underestimate nutrient intake compared to dietitians in adolescents

AYŞE BETÜL BİLEN, Hülya Yılmaz Önal, Gülen Ecem Kalkan
Frontiers in Nutrition
Nutritional Studies and Diet
article

Artificial intelligence diet plans underestimate nutrient intake compared to dietitians in adolescents

AYŞE BETÜL BİLEN, Hülya Yılmaz Önal, Gülen Ecem Kalkan
article en

Abstract

Objective Although artificial intelligence (AI)-based nutrition recommendations are becoming increasingly common among the public, the accuracy and reliability of diets produced especially for adolescents in the growth and development period are not sufficiently known. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical validity of AI by comparing the nutritional content of diets generated by different AI models with dietitian reference plans. Methods A total of 60 three-day diet plans were generated in two sessions by five AI models (ChatGPT-4o, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Claude 4.1, Bing Chat-5GPT, and Perplexity) for four standardized adolescent profiles in this cross-sectional and comparative study. A dietitian reference plan was prepared for each profile. Energy and macro-micronutrients were analyzed with BeBiS. Comparisons were evaluated with single-sample t -test, Cohen’s d, and Bland–Altman fit analyses. Results AI models tended to systematically undercalculate energy (bias: +695 kcal), protein (+19.9 g), lipid (+15.8 g), and carbohydrate (+114.6 g). In macronutrient percentages, protein (21.5–23.7%) and lipid (41.5–44.5%) ratios were above the recommended adolescent guidelines, while carbohydrate ratios (32.4–36.3%) were significantly below. Significant variation was observed between models in micronutrient contents, and no model showed consistent proximity to the dietitian across all nutrients. Conclusion AI models have exhibited clinically significant deviations in diet plans for adolescents at both macro and micro levels. The findings indicate that AI-based dietary recommendations are not appropriate to use without professional supervision, emphasizing the need for model improvements for more reliable data generation in this area.

Frontiers in NutritionVol. 13
Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (US), Istanbul Medeniyet University (TR)
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 29%
Nutritional Studies and Diet
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.