ArticleBMC public health2026
Development and validation of the new self-reported food and nutrition literacy questionnaire: Food and Nutrition Literacy Survey - FANSy.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and validation of the new self-reported food and nutrition literacy questionnaire: Food and Nutrition Literacy Survey - FANSy.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Associations between sociodemographic factors, experience of death and dying, and death literacy: A nationally representative cross-sectional study.Palliative care and social practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFood and nutrition literacy (FNL) is essential for promoting healthy dietary behaviors and addressing the global burden of chronic diseases. While various tools exist to assess food literacy (FL) and nutrition literacy (NL), many emphasize factual knowledge and lack cultural adaptability. There is a growing need for a concise, culturally neutral, self-assessment instrument that assesses perceived competencies in managing nutrition-related information.
methodsThe FANSy (Food and Nutrition Literacy Survey) questionnaire was developed using a six-step process based on established scale development methodology. The theoretical framework integrated elements from the Health Literacy Survey Europe (HLS-EU-Q), Rosas’s FL model, and Gibbs’s NL model. Questionnaire items were generated using a matrix that combined four core competencies (access, understand, appraise, apply) across four key domains (cooking skills, preserve and analyze, choice and acquisition, search and plan). An expert panel (n = 10) assessed content validity using the Item-level Content Validity Index (I-CVI) and Cohen’s kappa. Face validity was evaluated via cognitive interviews (n = 6). The survey was administered online to a representative UK adult sample (n = 2121). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Cronbach’s alpha were used to examine the dimensionality and internal consistency of the tool.
resultsTwo versions of the FANSy questionnaire were developed: a comprehensive format (FANSy-44) and a brief format (FANSy-17). Both formats showed high internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.972 for FANSy-44; 0.928 for FANSy-17). FANSy-17 demonstrated a strong correlation with the full version (r = 0.978). The mean FNL score was 66.5 (scale 0–100); females scored significantly higher than males (p = 0.019). No significant differences were observed across income or education groups.
conclusionsFANSy is a valid and reliable self-assessment tool for evaluating FNL in the general adult population. It is available in both comprehensive and brief formats and is applicable in research, public health, and clinical settings. Its culturally neutral design supports international comparability and future cross-cultural validation.
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.