Analysis of Fish-Consumption Benefits and Safety Knowledge in a Population-Based Sample of Polish Adolescents

Abstract

Inadequate fish consumption is common and may result from multiple reasons, especially in adolescents who are a population at particular risk of the negative consequences of not consuming the recommended amounts of fish. The aim of the study was to analyze the knowledge about fish-consumption benefits and safety in a population-based sample of Polish adolescents. The stratified random sampling was conducted within two stages: sampling of counties from all voivodeships in Poland (being the basic administrative units of Poland) and inviting secondary schools from the drawn counties to obtain a sample representative of all regions of Poland. The Computer-Assisted Web Interview (CAWI) method was applied to gather the data within the study, and a questionnaire concerning knowledge about fish-consumption benefits and safety with 20 true–false statements was applied. Among 1289 participants, the statement with the highest share of correct answers concerned fish being a source of protein (78.9%) and fish-derived fats being health promoting (77.0%). The statement receiving the least correct answers concerned the type of fatty acids found in fish (7.6%) and the risk of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in fish (20.5%). Participants who were female, older than 18, underweight, living in an urban environment, from a region far away from the sea and from comprehensive schools provided a higher share of correct answers than other subgroups (p < 0.05). Knowledge concerning fish-consumption benefits and safety among Polish adolescents is in many cases inadequate; thus, nutritional education is needed, especially among younger adolescents, those attending vocational schools, males and those living in a rural environment.

Determinants of Fish Intake and Complying with Fish Consumption Recommendations—A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study among Secondary School Students in Poland

“…To reduce the question order bias, the statements were intentionally put in a disorganized order, with not all statements concerning one issue consecutively. Also, to reduce the confirmation bias, the statements were intentionally formulated in a way to include a similar number of correct and false statements as presented in the recently published study [ 40 ]. Students were asked to evaluate each statement whether in their opinion it was true or false; they could choose the ‘I don’t know’ answer as well.…”