ArticleBMC nutrition2022
Development and psychometric analysis of a new tool to assess food literacy in diabetic patients.
Article in BMC nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOne of the factors affecting self-care in diabetic patients is food literacy, which helps said patients in following a healthy diet. Thus, it is crucial to analyze food literacy in diabetic patients through suitable and reliable instruments.
objectiveThe current study aimed to design a questionnaire for food literacy assessment in diabetic patients and analyze its psychometric features.
methodThe present study was a cross-sectional descriptive analysis carried out in 2021. Firstly, the concepts of food literacy in diabetic patients were identified and the questionnaire was deigned based on them. Secondly, its face and content validities and its reliability were analyzed. Finally, the construct validity was analyzed by exploratory factor analysis. The study was carried out on 300 diabetic participants chosen at random via stratified cluster sampling from Health service centers. The exploratory factor analysis was carried out by extracting the main factors and using varimax rotation with eigenvalue values more than 1.
resultsA five-pronged structure accounted for 52.745% of food literacy variance. This included the ability to read food facts, practical ability to group foods, the ability to identify the caloric content of different foods, the ability to understand the effect of food on health, and the ability to prepare a healthy meal. Items with an impact score below 1.5 were discarded. Additionally, items with CVR scores below 0.62 and CVI scores below 0.79 were deleted too. The Kaiser-Meyer-Okin measurement was 0.836 (p < 0.001). Alpha Cronbach Scale dimension was 0.610-0.951.
conclusionThe results of this study showed that the exploratory dimensions of the current study were consistent with health literacy measurements, such as functional, interactive, and critical food literacy. This scale has acceptable reliability and validity. Health professionals can use this scale to analyze and improve food literacy in diabetic patients. This is a new instrument and thus far no questionnaire has been made to evaluate food literacy in diabetic patients.
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.