ArticleRevista de saude publica2026
Association between food knowledge and adherence to the Brazilian Food Guide.
Article in Revista de saude publica, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the association between food knowledge according to the level of food processing and adherence to the recommendations of the Dietary Guidelines for the Brazilian Population.
methodsThis study was carried out with a subsample of the NutriNet-Brazil cohort based on quotas (n = 1,053). Adherence to the Guide was assessed using a scale of dietary practices (24 items), which generates a score ranging from 0 to 72. To assess knowledge, participants indicated on a scale of 1 to 10 how healthy they considered each item on a list of 12 foods in four categories (fruit, meat, dairy products and grains), including three groups from the Nova food classification: fresh or minimally processed (G1); processed (G3); and ultra-processed (G4). To generate the score (0 to 8), two points were assigned in each category when option G1 was evaluated as healthier than G3, and both as healthier than G4. In the analysis, sample weighting was used to bring the distribution of the sample closer to the profile of the Brazilian population. The association between the knowledge score and adherence to the Guide was tested using linear regression with adjustment for sociodemographic, socioeconomic and behavioral variables.
resultsThe mean score for adherence to the Guide was 43.1 (SD = 9.29) and the mean score for knowledge was 5.4 (SD = 1.2). In the crude model, for every one point increase in knowledge, adherence to the Guide increased by an average of 0.8 points (p = 0.002). The association remained significant in the adjusted model, but the coefficient was reduced to 0.6 (p = 0.020) with the inclusion of socioeconomic variables in the model.
conclusionGreater knowledge to recognize ultra-processed foods as less healthy is associated with greater adherence to the dietary practices recommended by the Dietary Guidelines for the Brazilian Population, reinforcing the importance of disseminating the recommendations.
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.