ArticleNutrition reviews2026
The Relationship between Health Literacy, Nutrition Literacy, and Food Literacy and Dietary Behaviors in Adults: A Systematic Review.
Article in Nutrition reviews, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Preliminary effectiveness of VR-enhanced nutrition education for promoting healthy diets among college students.Nutrition journal · 2025Trial
- Lower Health Literacy Is Associated with Poorer Diet Quality in Korean Adults: An Association Masked by Age.Nutrients · 2026Article
- Influence of Parental Lifestyle and Dietary Patterns on Mediterranean Diet Adherence in Children and Adolescents: A Cross-Sectional Study.Nutrients · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
contextNutrition interventions aiming to improve dietary behaviors often incorporate Health Literacy (HL), Nutrition Literacy (NL), or Food Literacy (FL), as a key component. The relationship between Health, Nutrition, and Food Literacy (HNFL) and dietary intake and diet adherence (eg, to dietary patterns or to recommended intake frequency guidelines) is unclear, and the role of the various literacy assessments remains unexamined. These gaps limit the understanding of how HNFL impacts efforts to improve dietary behaviors.
objectiveThis review aimed to examine how HNFL is associated with dietary intake and adherence to dietary patterns or guidelines, emphasizing the type and comprehensiveness of the HNFL assessments used. DATA SOURCES: Five electronic databases were used: PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Psycinfo, and Communication and Mass Media Complete. DATA EXTRACTION: Data screening, extraction, and quality assessment were performed independently by 4 reviewers using the PRISMA guidelines and a scale for study quality assessment. DATA ANALYSIS: A total of 49 studies were retrieved from the 2495 originally screened; 26 assessed dietary intake and 23 assessed adherence to particular dietary recommendations. The type of HNFL assessed varied; 27 studies assessed HL, 17 assessed NL, and 5 assessed FL. Seventy-two investigations of the relationship between HNFL and dietary intake and adherence were reported: 42 identified a positive relationship (ie, higher HNFL related to better dietary intake/adherence), 28 did not show a significant relationship, and 2 identified a negative relationship (ie, higher HNFL related to poorer dietary intake/adherence). Studies involving HL showed the most positive relationships to dietary behavior, especially when using more comprehensive tools. Many studies received low quality assessment scores due to psychometric weaknesses in their HNFL tools.
conclusionAlthough the relationship between HNFL and dietary behavior and adherence remains unconfirmed, patterns in the findings suggest that increased HL, especially if assessed with robust tools, is more likely to demonstrate positive associations with positive changes in dietary behavior. Future nutrition intervention studies should carefully select HNFL tools that are robust and appropriate for their research question. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration No. CRD42024556816.
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.