The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Exploring nutrition knowledge and the demographic variation in knowledge levels in an Australian community sample
Open accessAbstract
Objectives: Explore the level of general nutrition knowledge and demographic influences of knowledge levels in a community sample. Design and setting: A sample of volunteers, recruited from community centres in two suburbs of differing socio-economic status, in Adelaide, South Australia. Subjects: Two hundred and one people, aged 18 years and older, completed a modified and validated version of the General Nutrition Knowledge Questionnaire (113 items). The questionnaire was self-administered and completed under supervision. Results: Basic messages about eating more fruit, vegetables and fibre, and less fatty and salty foods were best understood. Confusion was evident with more detailed nutrition information. For example, 90 % of the people were aware of the recommendations to eat more fruit and vegetables, but 56 % and 62 % knew the recommended number of servings of fruit and vegetables, respectively. Descriptive statistics showed significant demographic variation in nutrition knowledge levels; multiple regression analysis confirmed the significant independent effects of gender, age, highest level of education and employment status on nutrition knowledge level (P< 0·01 level). The model accounted for 40 % of the variance in nutrition knowledge scores. Conclusions: There is demographic variation in nutrition knowledge levels and a broad lack of awareness of some public health nutrition recommendations. Having a detailed understanding of the deficiencies in community knowledge should allow for future nutrition education programmes to target subgroups of the population or particular areas of nutrition education, to more efficiently improve knowledge and influence dietary behaviour.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Development of a general nutrition knowledge Questionnaire for adults
Parmenter, K., & Wardle, J. (1999) · European Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.1600726 · Cited by 633
Cited by
The Nuances of Health Literacy, Nutrition Literacy, and Food Literacy
Velardo, S. (2015) · Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.jneb.2015.04.328 · Cited by 376
Food health claims – what consumers understand
Nocella, G., & Kennedy, O. (2012) · Food Policy · doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2012.06.001 · Cited by 170
Grunert, K. G., Wills, J., Celemín, L. F., Lähteenmäki, L., Scholderer, J., & Storcksdieck genannt Bonsmann, S. (2012) · Food Quality and Preference · doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2012.04.007 · Cited by 123
Jeruszka-Bielak, M., Kollajtis-Dolowy, A., Santoro, A., Ostan, R., Berendsen, A. A. M., Jennings, A., Meunier, N., Marseglia, A., Caumon, E., Gillings, R., et al. (2018) · Frontiers in Physiology · doi:10.3389/fphys.2018.00994 · Cited by 110
Bhawra, J., Kirkpatrick, S. I., Hall, M. G., Vanderlee, L., White, C. M., & Hammond, D. (2023) · Nutrition Journal · doi:10.1186/s12937-023-00844-x · Cited by 39
Burton, M., Wood, J. M., Booth, A. O., Worsley, A., Larsson, C., & Margerison, C. (2022) · Appetite · doi:10.1016/j.appet.2021.105817 · Cited by 23
Metadata
- Authors
- Hendrie, G. A., Coveney, J., & Cox, D.
- Venue
- Public Health Nutrition
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2008-12
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1365-1371
- ISSN
- 1368-9800 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-2727
- OpenAlex
- W2142345550
- Cited by
- 273
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 4.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.