ArticleNutrition (Burbank, Los Angeles County, Calif.)2020
Revisiting nutrition backlash: Psychometric properties and discriminant validity of the nutrition backlash scale.
Article in Nutrition (Burbank, Los Angeles County, Calif.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Healthy or not? The impact of conflicting health-related information on attentional resources.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2022Trial
- Prevalence and Potential Consequences of Exposure to Conflicting Information about Mammography: Results from Nationally-Representative Survey of U.S. Adults.Health communication · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesNutrition backlash is a disposition defined by negative feelings about dietary recommendations. Past research has measured nutrition backlash using the nutrition backlash scale (NBS) and found that it is negatively related to the consumption of fruits and vegetables. The aim of this study was to examine several aspects of the NBS, including factor structure, discriminant validity, and relationship to demographic characteristics and health behaviors.
methodsAdults were recruited to participate in two studies. Study 1 (N = 480) included measures of nutritional backlash, information overload, worry, fatalism, and nutrition-related behaviors. Study 2 (N = 399) was a follow-up that examined the factor structure of the NBS in a separate sample.
resultsIn study 1, a six-item version of the NBS was found to be a good fit for the data and discriminant from overload, worry, and fatalism. NBS was higher for those with less education, non-white participants, and men. Individuals with higher backlash were less likely to look at nutritional labels and to use sunscreen. Study 2 confirmed the factor structure from study 1.
conclusionsA six-item version of the NBS was found to be reliable, discriminant from related measures, higher in underserved groups (less-educated, non-white, and male participants), and related to nutrition label use.
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.