Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40467827›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Overconfidence in nutritional knowledge is linked to unnecessary gluten-free consumption.

Giovanbattista Califano, Riccardo Vecchio, Francesco Caracciolo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Giovanbattista CalifanoDepartment of Agricultural Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Riccardo VecchioDepartment of Agricultural Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Francesco CaraccioloDepartment of Agricultural Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy. francesco.caracciolo@unina.it.

Funding

Project funded under the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP), Mission 4 Component 2 Investment 1.3 - Call for proposals No. 341 of March 15, 2022 of Italian Ministry of University and Research funded by the European Union - NextGenerationEU. CUP D93C22000890001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rising consumption of gluten-free products among non-celiac individuals represents a burden for society due to these foods' lower nutritional quality, poorer taste, and higher cost. While these products are essential for individuals with celiac disease, an increasing number of consumers are choosing them for perceived health benefits. Indeed, subjective beliefs about food and nutrition significantly influence food choices, whether or not they align with scientific evidence. This study investigates the Dunning-Kruger effect within the domain of nutritional knowledge and its impact on consumer behavior. Here we show that individuals with low nutritional knowledge who overestimate their competence-a hallmark of the Dunning-Kruger effect-are more likely to consume gluten-free products without medical necessity. This overconfidence is compounded by narcissistic traits and is further associated with higher conspiracy beliefs about the food industry. These consumers appear vulnerable to marketplace exploitation, lacking the knowledge to make informed food choices while being unaware of this condition. Our findings emphasize the need for targeted communication strategies to guide consumers towards more evidence-based dietary choices, recognizing that fact-based interventions may be ineffective for those with high knowledge overconfidence.

Indexed as

Diet, Gluten-FreeFood PreferencesHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdultCeliac DiseaseConsumer BehaviorFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNutritive ValueYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID40467827
PMCPMC12137684

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.