Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33920515›Full record

ArticleNutrients2021

Development and Validation of the General Dietary Behavior Inventory (GDBI) in Scope of International Nutrition Guidelines.

Gerrit Engelmann, Matthias Marsall, Eva-Maria Skoda, Nadja Knoll-Pientka, Laura Bäuerle, Nanette Stroebele-Benschop, Martin Teufel, Alexander Bäuerle

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrients, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Validation of the English Version of the General Dietary Behavior Inventory (GDBI-E).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  13. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Gerrit EngelmannClinic of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University of Duisburg-Essen, University Hospital, 45147 Essen, Germany.
Matthias MarsallClinic of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University of Duisburg-Essen, University Hospital, 45147 Essen, Germany.
Eva-Maria SkodaClinic of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University of Duisburg-Essen, University Hospital, 45147 Essen, Germany.
Nadja Knoll-PientkaClinic of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University of Duisburg-Essen, University Hospital, 45147 Essen, Germany.
Laura BäuerleHochschule Niederrhein, Faculty of Food, University of Applied Science, Nutrition and Hospitality Science, 47805 Krefeld, Germany.
Nanette Stroebele-BenschopInstitute of Nutritional Medicine, University Hohenheim, 70599 Hohenheim, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5835-6945
Martin TeufelClinic of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University of Duisburg-Essen, University Hospital, 45147 Essen, Germany.
Alexander BäuerleClinic of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University of Duisburg-Essen, University Hospital, 45147 Essen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1488-8592
Essen University Hospital · DEHochschule Niederrhein · DEUniversity of Hohenheim · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Unhealthy eating is associated with various diseases, such as cardiovascular, neurodegenerative, or oncological. There are neither economical nor behavior-related questionnaires available in the German language to assess general dietary behavior. Therefore, the aim of this validation study was to develop an instrument considering these aspects and verifying its construct and criterion validity. The new questionnaire is based on the general nutrition recommendations of the World Health Organization and the German Nutrition Society. It consists of 16 items that contrast dietary behaviors on a semantic differential scale. Our German-speaking convenience sample consisted of 428 participants. The construct validity of the General Dietary Behavior Inventory (GDBI) could be confirmed by examining convergent and discriminant validity. Furthermore, criterion validity was confirmed (significant negative correlations with body weight, Body Mass Index, and positive correlations with physical/mental health as well as life satisfaction). A cluster analysis revealed two different dietary behavior clusters representing a rather healthy and a rather unhealthy dietary behavior cluster. The results indicate that the GDBI is a validated and economical instrument to assess general dietary behavior. In practical research, this questionnaire helps to assess dietary behavior and to derive interventions for a healthy dietary behavior in concordance with international nutrition recommendations.

Indexed as

Nutrition PolicyAdultBehavior Rating ScaleCluster AnalysisCross-Sectional StudiesDiet, HealthyDiet SurveysFeeding BehaviorFemaleGermanyHumansMalePsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesBody Mass Indexcluster analysisconstruct validationcriterion validitydietary behaviordietary recommendationinventoryweight

Identifiers

PMID33920515
PMCPMC8073993
OpenAlexW3156831334

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.