ArticleNutrients2025
Development of the Dietary Practices and Food Safety Literacy Scale for Older Adults.
Article in Nutrients, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThis study aimed to develop and validate a Dietary Practices and Food Safety Literacy Scale comprehensively assessing competencies among Korean older adults in healthy dietary practices, hygiene, and food safety.
methodsItem development was informed by a literature review, national dietary guidelines, and existing literacy frameworks. Content validity was reviewed by a 10-member expert panel using the Delphi method. Construct validity was tested using exploratory factor analyses (EFA) and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA), and reliability was assessed through Cronbach's α, composite reliability (CR), and average variance extracted (AVE).
resultsEFA identified three factors-management, decision-making, and moderation competencies-comprising 13 items. Internal consistency was acceptable (α = 0.69-0.83), and CFA supported the three-factor structure (CFI = 0.919, RMSEA = 0.087). CR values exceeded 0.70, and AVE were close to or exceeded the recommended threshold.
conclusionsThe scale demonstrates sound psychometric properties and provides a practical tool for identifying competency gaps in Dietary Practices and Food Safety Literacy. Its application may guide tailored health education and community-based interventions to promote healthy aging and support public health strategies in aging societies. By translating health information literacy into measurable, behavior-oriented domains, this tool bridges the gap between theoretical constructs and practical assessment. It can be incorporated into routine health monitoring, enabling policymakers and practitioners to design evidence-based interventions that enhance older adults' dietary self-management and food safety awareness.
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.