Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30221085›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2018

A comparison of perceptions of nuts between the general public, dietitians, general practitioners, and nurses.

Rachel Clare Brown, Andrew Robert Gray, Lee Ching Yong, Alex Chisholm, Sook Ling Leong, Siew Ling Tey

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 41% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Knowledge, practices and perceptions of energy labelling of nut products among Australian consumers and stakeholders: an online survey.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Barriers and Facilitators to Nut Consumption: A Narrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Review
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rachel Clare BrownDepartment of Human Nutrition, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Andrew Robert GrayBiostatistics Unit, Dean's Office, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Lee Ching YongDepartment of Human Nutrition, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Alex ChisholmDepartment of Human Nutrition, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Sook Ling LeongDepartment of Human Nutrition, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Siew Ling TeyDepartment of Human Nutrition, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
University of Otago · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNut consumption at the population level remains low despite the well-documented benefits of their consumption, including their cardioprotective effects. Studies have suggested that advice from health professionals may be a means to increase nut consumption levels. Understanding how nuts are perceived by the public and health professionals, along with understanding the public's perceptions of motivators of and deterrents to consuming nuts, may inform the development of initiatives to improve on these low levels of consumption. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to compare perceptions of nuts among three groups of health professionals (dietitians, general practioners, and practice nurses) and the general public in New Zealand (NZ), along with motivators of and deterrents to consuming nuts amongst the general public and their experiences of receiving advice around nut consumption.

methodsThe NZ electoral roll was used to identify dietitians, general practitioners (GPs), and practice nurses, based on their free-text occupation descriptions, who were then invited to complete a questionnaire with 318, 292, and 149 respondents respectively. 1,600 members of the general public were randomly selected from the roll with 710 respondents. Analyses were performed using chi-squared tests to look at differences in categorical variables and linear regression for differences in other variables between the four survey groups.

resultsAlthough there were significant differences between the four groups regarding the perceptions of nuts, in general there was agreement that nuts are healthy, high in protein and fat, are filling, and some nuts are high in selenium. We noted frequent agreement that the general public participants would consume more if nuts: improved health (67%), were more affordable (60%), or improved the nutrient content (59%) and balance of fats (58%) within their diets. Over half the respondents reported they would eat more nuts if they were advised to do so by a dietitian or doctor, despite less than 4% reporting they had received such advice. The most frequently selected deterrents to increasing nut consumption were: cost (67%), potential weight gain (66%), and leading to eating too much fat (63%). DISCUSSION: It is concerning that so few among the general public report receiving advice to consume more nuts from health professionals, especially given their apparent responsiveness to such advice. Health professionals could exploit the motivators of nut consumption, while also addressing the deterrents, to promote nut intake. These factors should also be addressed in public health messages to encourage regular nut consumption among the public. Educational initiatives could also be used to improve the nutritional knowledge of GPs and practice nurses with regard to nuts, although even dietitians were unsure of their knowledge in some cases.

Indexed as

BarriersGeneral publicHealth professionalsMotivatorsNutsPerceptions

Identifiers

PMID30221085
PMCPMC6138036
OpenAlexW2890500293

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.