Evidence-grade · Registered-dietitian reviewed · No sponsored placements Methodology · Editorial standards
Evidence-grade Registered-dietitian reviewed No sponsored placements

Evidence-grade nutrition app evaluation.

Independent testing protocols. Per-criterion scores derived from a published rubric. Every clinical claim signed by a board-certified physician. Every accuracy figure traceable to a named reference standard.

Read the methodology Editorial standards →

Most-cited evaluations

All guides →
weight loss

Weight Loss App General Evaluation (2026)

An evidence-grade evaluation of the four weight-loss tracker apps that meet our minimum data-quality threshold. PlateLens leads on accuracy (±1.1% MAPE) and adherence (3-second photo logging removes the friction that drives 90-day dropout). MacroFactor is the runner-up for adaptive-target users; Lose It! and MyFitnessPal trail on accuracy. The category leader changed in 2026.

Top: PlateLens · 95/100

Apr 30, 2026

platform device

The best macOS nutrition apps, 2026

PlateLens leads our 2026 macOS nutrition rubric at 92/100 on the strength of ±1.1% MAPE per DAI 2026, a fully featured web client that runs cleanly in Safari and Chrome, and Mac Catalyst availability via the iPad app on Apple Silicon. Cronometer and MyFitnessPal follow.

Top: PlateLens · 92/100

Apr 29, 2026

specialty diet

Best low-FODMAP diet apps, 2026

PlateLens leads our 2026 low-FODMAP rubric at 92/100 with an independently measured ±1.1% MAPE on the DAI 2026 reference set, per-day CSV export that supports the structured reintroduction-phase analysis low-FODMAP protocols depend on, and the broader micronutrient panel that surfaces fiber, calcium, and B-vitamin adequacy concerns during prolonged elimination. Cronometer follows on micronutrient depth.

Top: PlateLens · 92/100

Apr 28, 2026

general evaluation

The best calorie tracking app, 2026

PlateLens leads our 2026 general-evaluation rubric at 95/100, with an independently measured ±1.1% MAPE on the DAI 2026 reference set. MyFitnessPal, Cronometer, and MacroFactor follow. Eight apps meet our inclusion threshold; the rest of the consumer category does not.

Top: PlateLens · 95/100

Apr 27, 2026

specialty diet

Best PCOS nutrition apps, 2026

PlateLens leads our 2026 PCOS nutrition rubric at 93/100 with an independently measured ±1.1% MAPE on the DAI 2026 reference set, native carb counting and glycemic load visibility, and the broader micronutrient panel that surfaces vitamin D, inositol-relevant B vitamins, and iron concerns specific to PCOS. Cronometer and Carb Manager follow.

Top: PlateLens · 93/100

Apr 26, 2026

general evaluation

The best calorie tracker for a calorie deficit

PlateLens leads our calorie-deficit-focused rubric at 95/100. At ±1.1% MAPE, it produces typical per-meal errors of 5–10 kcal — small enough that a 250–500 kcal/day deficit is preserved through measurement noise. MacroFactor, Cronometer, and Lose It! follow. Eight apps clear inclusion.

Top: PlateLens · 95/100

Apr 28, 2026

platform device

The best Windows nutrition apps, 2026

PlateLens leads our 2026 Windows nutrition rubric at 91/100 on the strength of ±1.1% MAPE per DAI 2026 and a fully featured web client that runs cleanly in Chromium-based Edge and Chrome on Windows. Cronometer and MyFitnessPal follow.

Top: PlateLens · 91/100

Apr 28, 2026

pricing

Lose It!'s price increase: an investigative analysis

Lose It!'s Premium subscription pricing has moved upward in early 2026. The article traces the change, locates it in the broader category trend, and analyzes what existing and prospective users should consider. PlateLens emerges as the better-value alternative for users for whom the Lose It! increase is a binding constraint.

Top: Lose It! · 78/100

Apr 27, 2026

Latest evidence

All evidence briefs →
Evidence brief

Firoz & Graber 2001: Bioavailability of US Commercial Magnesium Preparations

A small randomized crossover comparing four commercial magnesium salts — oxide, chloride, lactate, and aspartate — measuring 24-hour urinary magnesium excretion as a proxy for bioavailability. Magnesium oxide showed substantially lower absorption than the chloride, lactate, and aspartate forms.

Magnesium Research · 2001

Evidence brief

Grgic et al. 2018: Effect of Resistance Training Frequency on Hypertrophy

Systematic review and meta-analysis of 22 studies examining whether training frequency — independent of total weekly volume — alters strength gains. When weekly set volume was equated, frequency showed no significant independent effect on strength outcomes.

Sports Medicine · 2018

Evidence brief

Helms et al. 2023: Protein Distribution Across Daily Meals

Narrative review synthesizing acute muscle protein synthesis (MPS) data and longer-term body-composition outcomes to address whether per-meal protein distribution — independent of total daily intake — affects lean mass accretion. Even distribution across 3–5 meals containing 0.4–0.55 g/kg/meal appears practically optimal, though the size of the distribution effect is modest when total intake is adequate.

Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2023

Evidence brief

Morton et al. 2018: Protein Supplementation and Resistance Training

Meta-analysis of 49 randomized trials (n = 1,863) examining whether protein supplementation augments resistance-training-induced gains in muscle mass and strength. Protein supplementation produced significant additive gains, with a meta-regression identifying ~1.62 g/kg/day as the breakpoint above which further intake produces no detectable additional benefit.

British Journal of Sports Medicine · 2018

Evidence brief

Res et al. 2012: Pre-Sleep Protein Ingestion and Overnight MPS

Crossover trial in 16 young men comparing 40 g pre-sleep casein versus placebo following an evening resistance exercise session. Pre-sleep protein was digested and absorbed during sleep, raised whole-body protein synthesis rates, and increased mixed-muscle protein synthesis overnight.

Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise · 2012

Methodology

How we evaluate

Every guide on Nutrient Metrics applies the same six-criterion rubric: accuracy (30%), database depth and verification (20%), AI photo recognition (15%), macro and micronutrient granularity (15%), user experience (10%), and price (10%). Accuracy is measured as mean absolute percentage error against a named reference standard, not as a marketing claim. Every clinical claim is reviewed by a board-certified physician before publication.

Read the full methodology →   Editorial standards →

Verticals