ArticleHeliyon2024
Modern vs traditional indigenous diet preference in Gauteng region, South Africa: A public health concern?
Article in Heliyon, 2024. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The prevalence of non-communicable diseases still represents a public health concern in South Africa, of which eating habits are some of the main risk factors. A modern diet consisting of the consumption of highly processed foods high in fat, salt and caloric sweeteners and low in fibre is recognised as unhealthy. This study was conducted to assess the penchant of the population for these types of foods rather than traditional indigenous foods known to be healthier. This research was undertaken in the Gauteng region, which is the most urbanized province in the country. This study consisted of a quantitative research survey conducted in 2019 with 1527 participants (Asians, Black, Coloured, Indians and White) aged 18 and above who had lived in the province for at least two years. The results revealed that 30-40 % were neutral on the issue. Despite half (54.4 %) indicating that it was good to mix traditional and modern foods, a clear preference for modern food was noticed for 35.7 % of respondents, with 32.2 % reporting not being concerned that traditional foods have been replaced by modern foods. The traditional indigenous food consumption (TIFC) appeared to depend on monthly total household income, residential area, and settlement category. Participants with specific economic comfort consumed less. Race and number of people in the participants' households also significantly affected the TIFC (p < 0.05). Participants of white ethnicity and those living in a household of a maximum of 02 people displayed the lowest TIFC. In comparison to those who strongly disagree, participants with a neutral opinion about the idea of mixing eating habits were also the most neutral concerning preference for a modern diet (OR: 10.95, 95 % CI 7.00-17.12) and nutrition transition (OR: 14.66, 95 % CI 9.09-23.64). Sensitisation about healthy eating habits among the identified at-risk and target groups is undoubtedly a need in the region to avoid a resurgence of modern diet-related diseases.
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.