Just a subtle difference? Findings from a systematic review on definitions of nutrition literacy and food literacy

Abstract

Nutrition literacy and food literacy have become increasingly important concepts in health promotion. Researchers use one or the other term to describe the competencies needed to maintain a healthy diet. This systematic review examines whether these terms are synonymous or if their meanings are substantially different.We searched major bibliographic databases (Web of Science, PubMed, ScienceDirect, CINAHL, SocIndex and ERIC) for publications that provided an original definition of nutrition or food literacy. Then we used Nutbeam’s tripartite health literacy model as an analytical grid. The definitions we found included specific competencies, which we mapped to the domains of functional, interactive, or critical literacy.In the 173 full-text publications we screened, we found six original definitions of nutrition literacy, and 13 original definitions of food literacy. Seven food literacy definitions were integrated into a conceptual framework. Analysing their structure revealed that nutrition literacy and food literacy are seen as specific forms of health literacy, and represent distinct but complementary concepts. Definitions of nutrition literacy mainly described the abilities necessary to obtain and understand nutrition information. Definitions of food literacy incorporated a broader spectrum of theoretical and practical knowledge and skills. To be food literate also means to apply information on food choices and critically reflect on the effect of food choice on personal health and on society. Since food literacy is based on a more comprehensive understanding of health behaviours, it is the more viable term to use in health promotion interventions. For the practical implication, a harmonization of the different definitions is desirable.

School-based interventions for promoting food and nutrition literacy (FNLIT) in elementary school children: a systematic review protocol

“…The proposed systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted following the guidance in the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook of Systematic Reviews [34]. The methods and results will be reported in accordance with the reporting guidance provided in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement [35].…”

Validity and Internal Consistency of the Preschool-FLAT, a New Tool for the Assessment of Food Literacy in Young Children from the Training-To-Health Project

“…Recent studies showed that FL can be interpreted as a specific form of health literacy [47], which was theorized by the Nutbeam's model as being characterized by three levels as functional, interactive and critical [48]. The lowest functional level includes basic reading and writing skills necessary to understand and follow simple nutrition messages; the interactive level includes the skill of sharing nutritional information with others to promote healthy eating pattern; the critical level is the ability to analyze nutrition information critically, increase awareness, and participate in action to address barriers.…”

A Web-Based Gamification Program to Improve Nutrition Literacy in Families of 3- to 5-Year-Old Children: The Nutriscience Project

“…Articles were found using terms like food literacy, nutrition literacy or functional literacy, interactive literacy, critical literacy (all applied to nutrition), and health literacy, apparently referring to similar issues. 25,32,41 Two food and nutrition literacy questionnaires validated for Portuguese population were found, 42,43 but required a high baseline literacy by the target population. Those questionnaires were focused, respectively, on labels reading and calculation 38 ; and nutrition topics like antioxidants, micronutrients, and nutritional therapy for diseases 39 ; as the Nutriscience Project aimed to reach the whole spectrum of social socioeconomic status, these questionnaires were not appropriate.…”