ArticleScientific reports2026
Consumer awareness, perceptions and purchasing behaviour regarding fortified wheat flour available in the market.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study examined consumer awareness regarding fortified wheat flour available in the market. A total of 300 households were selected using stratified random sampling. Based on socio-economic status assessed through the Modified Kuppuswamy Scale, 180 respondents (60 each from Upper, Upper Middle, and Lower Middle classes) were selected for assessing awareness, preference, and consumption of fortified wheat flour. Data were collected using a pre-tested structured interview schedule. It was revealed that awareness level was the highest among the Upper Class across all aspects of food fortification, with particularly strong knowledge of macro & micronutrients (91.70%). Awareness decreased across socioeconomic groups, with the Lower Middle Class showing the least understanding, especially regarding the fortification logo (26.70%). The computed Chi-square value for overall awareness (10.97) was found to be non-significant. A majority of respondents perceived fortified wheat flour as costlier, while Lower Middle class respondents more frequently reported a taste difference between fortified and unfortified wheat flour. Fortified flours were perceived as safest for pregnant women (56.10%), lactating mothers (52.20%), and infants (45%). The Chi-square test for these categories yielded a value of 19.82, which was not statistically significant, indicating no significant difference in preference among socio-economic classes. Fewer subjects associated them with specific groups like athletes, aged, or diseased persons, with awareness the highest among the Upper Class. The study concluded that although fortified wheat flour was available in the market, gaps existed in consumer awareness, indicating the need for improved consumer education.
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.