ArticlePublic health nutrition2025
Testing and adapting dietary habits and food security questions for a national nutrition survey using cognitive interviews and expert consultation.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo cognitively test questions for inclusion in a national nutrition survey, ensuring the questions are interpreted as intended, and to inform further improvements.
designA draft nutrition survey questionnaire was developed based on existing questionnaires and expert input. Twelve questions on dietary habits and food security were selected for cognitive testing as these were newly developed, amended from existing questions or identified to no longer reflect the current food environment or concepts. Cognitive interviews were conducted using both think-aloud and probing techniques to capture respondents' thought processes used to arrive at an answer. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Qualitative data were analysed for recurring patterns and unique discoveries across the survey questions.
settingNew Zealand.
participantsSixty-eight participants aged 11 years and older, representing diverse socio-demographics including gender, ethnicity and education level.
resultsThree main cognitive challenges were identified: (1) interpreting ambiguous terms, (2) understanding dietary or technical terms and (3) following complex or unclear instructions. Questions were refined based on the study findings and further advice from experts in nutrition and survey design to enhance participant understanding and accuracy.
conclusionsThe cognitive testing findings and expert input led to the refinement and potential improvement of selected questions for inclusion in a national nutrition survey. Changes included simplified terminology, clearer instructions, improved examples and better question order. Our methodological approach and findings may be valuable for those designing similar questions for dietary surveys.
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.