ArticlePloS one2014
Psychological determinants of consumer acceptance of personalised nutrition in 9 European countries.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed.
- Personalising dietary advice for disease prevention: concepts and experiences.Pflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology · 2025Review
- Public perceptions of biospecimen sampling and uncertainty in the context of personalised nutrition.PloS one · 2025Article
- Precision or Personalized Nutrition: A Bibliometric Analysis.Nutrients · 2024Article
- Health Belief and Behavioral Analysis of Fad Diets: A Perspective from Younger Generations in a Developing Country.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Factors influencing the intention of young adults to adopt genotype-based personalised advice on diet and physical activity according to perceived weight status.Journal of nutritional science · 2024Article
- The Impact of Both Individual and Contextual Factors on the Acceptance of Personalized Dietary Advice.Nutrients · 2022Article
- A high-fibre personalised dietary advice given via a web tool reduces constipation complaints in adults.Journal of nutritional science · 2022Article
- Sex and age differences in attitudes and intention to adopt personalised nutrition in a UK sample.Zeitschrift fur Gesundheitswissenschaften = Journal of public health · 2021Article
- Exploring the Potential of Personalized Dietary Advice for Health Improvement in Motivated Individuals With Premetabolic Syndrome: Pretest-Posttest Study.JMIR formative research · 2021Article
- Knowledge, opinions and expectations of adults concerning personalised genotype-based dietary recommendations: a German survey.Public health nutrition · 2021Article
- Consumer acceptance of genetic-based personalized nutrition in Hungary.Genes & nutrition · 2021Article
- Determinants of stakeholders' intention to adopt pharmacogenomic.The pharmacogenomics journal · 2020Article
- Predictors of stakeholders' intention to adopt nutrigenomics.Genes & nutrition · 2020Article
- Consumer acceptance of personalised nutrition: The role of ambivalent feelings and eating context.PloS one · 2020Article
- Dynamic Macronutrient Meal-Equivalent Menu Method: Towards Individual Nutrition Intervention Programs.Methods and protocols · 2019Article
- An App to Improve Eating Habits of Adolescents and Young Adults (Challenge to Go): Systematic Development of a Theory-Based and Target Group-Adapted Mobile App Intervention.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2019Article
- A Scientific Perspective of Personalised Gene-Based Dietary Recommendations for Weight Management.Nutrients · 2019Review
- Article
- Current knowledge and interest of French Canadians regarding nutrigenetics.Genes & nutrition · 2019Article
- Food choice motives, attitude towards and intention to adopt personalised nutrition.Public health nutrition · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo develop a model of the psychological factors which predict people's intention to adopt personalised nutrition. Potential determinants of adoption included perceived risk and benefit, perceived self-efficacy, internal locus of control and health commitment.
methodsA questionnaire, developed from exploratory study data and the existing theoretical literature, and including validated psychological scales was administered to N=9381 participants from 9 European countries (Germany, Greece, Ireland, Poland, Portugal, Spain, the Netherlands, the UK, and Norway).
resultsStructural equation modelling indicated that the greater participants' perceived benefits to be associated with personalised nutrition, the more positive their attitudes were towards personalised nutrition, and the greater their intention to adopt it. Higher levels of nutrition self-efficacy were related to more positive attitudes towards, and a greater expressed intention to adopt, personalised nutrition. Other constructs positively impacting attitudes towards personalised nutrition included more positive perceptions of the efficacy of regulatory control to protect consumers (e.g. in relation to personal data protection), higher self-reported internal health locus of control, and health commitment. Although higher perceived risk had a negative relationship with attitude and an inverse relationship with perceived benefit, its effects on attitude and intention to adopt personalised nutrition was less influential than perceived benefit. The model was stable across the different European countries, suggesting that psychological factors determining adoption of personalised nutrition have generic applicability across different European countries.
conclusionThe results suggest that transparent provision of information about potential benefits, and protection of consumers' personal data is important for adoption, delivery of public health benefits, and commercialisation of personalised nutrition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.