BackgroundWith the increase use of convenience food and eating outside the home environment being linked to the obesity epidemic, the need to assess and monitor individuals cooking and food skills is key to help intervene where necessary to promote the usage of these skills. Therefore, this research aimed to develop and validate a measure for cooking skills and one for food skills, that are clearly described, relatable, user-friendly, suitable for different types of studies, and applicable across all sociodemographic levels.MethodsTwo measures were developed in light of the literature and expert opinion and piloted for clarity and ease of use. Following this, four studies were undertaken across different cohorts (including a sample of students, both ‘Food preparation novices’ and ‘Experienced food preparers’, and a nationally representative sample) to assess temporal stability, psychometrics, internal consistency reliability and construct validity of both measures. Analysis included T-tests, Pearson’s correlations, factor analysis, and Cronbach’s alphas, with a significance level of 0.05.ResultsBoth measures were found to have a significant level of temporal stability (P < 0.001). Factor analysis revealed three factors with eigenvalues over 1, with two items in a third factor outside the two suggested measures. The internal consistency reliability for the cooking skills confidence measure ranged from 0.78 to 0.93 across all cohorts. The food skills confidence measure’s Cronbach’s alpha’s ranged from 0.85 to 0.94. The two measures also showed a high discriminate validity as there were significant differences (P < 0.05 for cooking skills confidence and P < 0.01 for food skills confidence) between Food preparation novices’ and ‘Experienced food preparers.’ConclusionsThe cooking skills confidence measure and the food skills confidence measure have been shown to have a very satisfactory reliability, validity and are consistent over time. Their user-friendly applicability make both measures highly suitable for large scale cross-sectional, longitudinal and intervention studies to assess or monitor cooking and food skills levels and confidence.

Domestic cooking skills (CS) and food skills (FS) encompass multiple components, yet there is a lack of consensus on their constituent parts, inter-relatedness or measurement, leading to limited empirical support for their role in influencing dietary quality. This review assessed the measurement of CS and FS in adults (>16 years); critically examining study designs, psychometric properties of measures, theoretical basis and associations of CS/FS with diet.Electronic databases (PsychInfo), published reports and systematic reviews on cooking and home food preparation interventions (Rees et al. 2012;Reicks et al. 2014) provided 834 articles of which 26 met the inclusion criteria. Multiple CS/FS measures were identified across three study designs: qualitative; cross-sectional; and dietary interventions; conducted from 1998-2013. Most measures were not theory-based, limited psychometric data was available, with little consistency of items or scales used for CS/FS measurements. Some positive associations between CS/FS and FV intake were reported; though lasting dietary changes were uncommon. The role of psychosocial (e.g., gender, attitudes) and external factors (e.g. food availability) on CS/FS is discussed.A conceptual framework of CS/FS components is presented for future measurement facilitation, which highlights the role for CS/FS on food-related behaviour and dietary quality. This will aid future dietary intervention design.

BackgroundInterventions to increase cooking skills (CS) and food skills (FS) as a route to improving overall diet are popular within public health. This study tested a comprehensive model of diet quality by assessing the influence of socio-demographic, knowledge- and psychological-related variables alongside perceived CS and FS abilities. The correspondence of two measures of diet quality further validated the Eating Choices Index (ECI) for use in quantitative research.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted in a quota-controlled nationally representative sample of 1049 adults aged 20–60 years drawn from the Island of Ireland. Surveys were administered in participants’ homes via computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) assessing a range of socio-demographic, knowledge- and psychological-related variables alongside perceived CS and FS abilities. Regression models were used to model factors influencing diet quality. Correspondence between 2 measures of diet quality was assessed using chi-square and Pearson correlations.ResultsECI score was significantly negatively correlated with DINE Fat intake (r = -0.24, p < 0.001), and ECI score was significantly positively correlated with DINE Fibre intake (r = 0.38, p < 0.001), demonstrating a high agreement. Findings indicated that males, younger respondents and those with no/few educational qualifications scored significantly lower on both CS and FS abilities. The relative influence of socio-demographic, knowledge, psychological variables and CS and FS abilities on dietary outcomes varied, with regression models explaining 10–20 % of diet quality variance. CS ability exerted the strongest relationship with saturated fat intake (β = -0.296, p < 0.001) and was a significant predictor of fibre intake (β = -0.113, p < 0.05), although not for healthy food choices (ECI) (β = 0.04, p > 0.05).ConclusionGreater CS and FS abilities may not lead directly to healthier dietary choices given the myriad of other factors implicated; however, CS appear to have differential influences on aspects of the diet, most notably in relation to lowering saturated fat intake. Findings suggest that CS and FS should not be singular targets of interventions designed to improve diet; but targeting specific sub-groups of the population e.g. males, younger adults, those with limited education might be more fruitful. A greater understanding of the interaction of factors influencing cooking and food practices within the home is needed.

BackgroundEvidence suggests that short sleep duration may be a newly identified modifiable risk factor for obesity, yet there is a paucity of studies to investigate this.ObjectiveWe assessed the feasibility of a personalized sleep extension protocol in adults aged 18–64 y who are habitually short sleepers (5 to <7 h), with sleep primarily measured by wrist actigraphy. In addition, we collected pilot data to assess the effects of extended sleep on dietary intake and quality measured by 7-d food diaries, resting and total energy expenditure, physical activity, and markers of cardiometabolic health.DesignForty-two normal-weight healthy participants who were habitually short sleepers completed this free-living, 4-wk, parallel-design randomized controlled trial. The sleep extension group (n = 21) received a behavioral consultation session targeting sleep hygiene. The control group (n = 21) maintained habitual short sleep.ResultsRates of participation, attrition, and compliance were 100%, 6.5%, and 85.7%, respectively. The sleep extension group significantly increased time in bed [0:55 hours:minutes (h:mm); 95% CI: 0:37, 1:12 h:mm], sleep period (0:47 h:mm; 95% CI: 0:29, 1:05 h:mm), and sleep duration (0:21 h:mm; 95% CI: 0:06, 0:36 h:mm) compared with the control group. Sleep extension led to reduced intake of free sugars (–9.6 g; 95% CI: –16.0, –3.1 g) compared with control (0.7 g; 95% CI: –5.7, 7.2 g) (P = 0.042). A sensitivity analysis in plausible reporters showed that the sleep extension group reduced intakes of fat (percentage), carbohydrates (grams), and free sugars (grams) in comparison to the control group. There were no significant differences between groups in markers of energy balance or cardiometabolic health.ConclusionsWe showed the feasibility of extending sleep in adult short sleepers. Sleep extension led to reduced free sugar intakes and may be a viable strategy to facilitate limiting excessive consumption of free sugars in an obesity-promoting environment. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02787577.

Our findings contribute to understanding how individuals define cooking from 'scratch', and barriers and facilitators to cooking with raw ingredients. Interventions should focus on practical sessions to increase cooking self-efficacy; highlight the importance of planning ahead and teach methods such as batch cooking and freezing to facilitate cooking from scratch.