The DOI matches its Crossref record; its reference list is not available.
Primary Care Providers Need a Variety of Nutrition and Wellness Patient Education Materials
Abstract
Objective To assess and document the need for nutrition and wellness patient education materials. Design The results of open-ended interviews and focus groups were used to develop a mail-type survey. The 46-item survey addressed barriers to using nutrition and wellness education materials as well as format, education/reading level, foreign languages, and topics needed. North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service (NCCES) family and consumer education agents distributed surveys to family and general practices throughout North Carolina. Subjects Of the 721 primary care providers surveyed, 303 (42%) returned usable surveys. Respondents practiced in 89 of the 100 counties of the state served by NCCES family and consumer education agents. Statistical analysis performed Descriptive statistics and independent sample t tests were used to analyze survey results. Results Limited time with patients and inability to obtain materials because of cost or being unsure of sources were most often identified as barriers to using nutrition and wellness materials. Of the 26 topics surveyed, 6 had mean levels of need greater than or equal to high need (mean score > or = 4): weight control for adults, smoking cessation, changing dietary fat intake, exercise guidelines for healthy adults, general stress management guidelines, and healthful eating for older adults. Twenty-four of the 26 topics had mean levels of need greater than or equal to moderate need (mean score > or = 3). Topics with moderate n…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Insufficient time, lack of knowledge, training or confidence and inadequate materials are major barriers to health professionals giving weight loss advice.
“with insufficient time, lack of knowledge, training or confidence and inadequate materials reported to be major barriers.12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18”
From A brief intervention for weight control based on habit-formation theory delivered through primary care: results from a randomised controlled trial (2017) · cites this paper as [15]
Citations
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 23 · Cited by 31
Research works printed but not linked: 12
- 1995, Death and death rates for major causes of death for the United States, each division, and state; and by race and sex for the United States, 1992, Monthly Vital Stat Rep., 43, 51
- 1999, ADA Courier., 38, 3
- Orleans, 1985, Health promotion in primary care, Prev Med., 14, 636, 10.1016/0091-7435(85)90083-0 · DOI
- Hiddink, 1995, Nutrition guidance by primary-care physicians, Eur J Clin Nutr., 49, 842
- Dodds, 1995, A survey of physician's use and needs regarding nutrition education materials, Top Clin Nutr., 10, 90, 10.1097/00008486-199509000-00012 · DOI
- Tapper-Jones, 1988, General practitioner's use of written materials during consultations, BMJ., 296, 908, 10.1136/bmj.296.6626.908 · DOI
- Kelly, 1990, A survey of physician's uses/opinions regarding nutrition education resources, J Can Diet Assoc., 51, 409
- Macer, 1998, Factors influencing nutrition education for patients with low literacy skills, J Am Diet Assoc., 98, 559, 10.1016/S0002-8223(98)00125-4 · DOI
- Wilson, 1996, Patient education materials nurses use in community health, West J Nurs Res., 18, 195, 10.1177/019394599601800207 · DOI
- Cooley, 1995, Patient literacy and the readability of written cancer education materials, Oncol Nurs Forum., 22, 1345
- Dollahite, 1996, Readability of printed sources of diet and health information, Patient Educ Couns., 27, 123, 10.1016/0738-3991(95)00829-2 · DOI
- 1998, Communicating with patients with limited literacy skills, J Fam Pract., 46, 168
Metadata
- Authors
- KENNER, M. M., TAYLOR, M. L., DUNN, P. C., GRUCHOW, H. W., & KOLASA, K.
- Affiliations
- University of North Carolina at Greensboro (US)
- North Carolina State University (US)
- East Carolina University (US)
- Corresponding author
- TAYLOR, MARTHA L
- ORCID
- TAYLOR, MARTHA L
- Venue
- Journal of the American Dietetic Association
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1999-04
- Volume
- 99
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 462-466
- ISSN
- 0002-8223 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2084061470
- Cited by
- 31
- References
- 23
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 3.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of the American Dietetic Association (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Dietetics, Nutrition, and Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Public Health and Nutrition
- Keywords
- primary care providers, barriers to patient education, educational needs assessment, handouts, Spanish-language materials, weight management, smoking cessation, dietary fat intake, exercise recommendations, stress management, cooperative extension
- MeSH terms
- Data Collection, Health Promotion, Humans, North Carolina, Patient Education as Topic, Physicians, Family, Primary Health Care, Teaching Materials, Needs Assessment, Nutritional Sciences
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
