4.6 Article

Types of Nutrition Knowledge, Their Socio-Demographic Determinants and Their Association With Food Consumption: Results of the NEMONIT Study

期刊

FRONTIERS IN NUTRITION
卷 8, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2021.630014

关键词

nutrition knowledge; types of knowledge; food consumption; dietary recommendations; healthy eating; NEMONIT

资金

  1. German Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study investigated nutrition knowledge in the German population, its determinants and its association with food consumption. Results showed areas for knowledge enhancement, with higher nutrition knowledge among females, younger individuals, and those with high socio-economic status. Correlations between nutrition knowledge and a favorable diet were significant but low.
Objectives: To investigate nutrition knowledge in the German population, its determinants and its association with food consumption. Methods: Data were obtained from the NEMONIT study (2014/15, n = 1,505, participants' age: 22-80 years). Nutrition knowledge was measured using the consumer nutrition knowledge scale (CoNKS) in a computer-assisted telephone interview. Two 24-h recalls were conducted to assess food consumption, which was evaluated using the Healthy Eating Index-NVS II. Results: Areas for knowledge enhancement were the understanding of health benefits of fruit and vegetable consumption, the concept of a balanced diet and saturated fatty acids. Nutrition knowledge was higher among females, younger and high socio-economic status participants. Correlations between nutrition knowledge and a favorable diet were significant but low. Analyses of types of nutrition knowledge yielded similar results for procedural knowledge and knowledge on nutrients but not for knowledge on calories. Conclusions: Areas for knowledge enhancement were identified, but an increase in nutrition knowledge alone seems unlikely to result in large improvements of dietary behavior.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据