Tailored nutrition education in the elderly can lead to sustained dietary behaviour change

Abstract

The dementia specific nutrition program produced a large effect in knowledge improvement from pre to post, which was retained at follow up, consolidated observational and participatory learning which produced a moderate increase in healthy dietary behaviours which participants valued and sustained.

Towards the Implementation of a Conceptual Framework of Food and Nutrition Literacy: Providing Healthy Eating for the Population

“…The authors of three papers pointed out that NL gave rise to skilled individuals [22,29,30], since the authors of other eight papers conceptualized NL as a skill-based process that led individuals to make healthy food choices and develop healthy dietary habits [22,35,[45][46][47]49,51,54]. Analogously, twelve papers that discussed FL agreed that this dimension implied improved food and nutrition knowledge, and skills such as cooking [16,21,23,37,56,61,62,65,[70][71][72][73]. The authors of twenty-three papers also stated that the achievement of FL leads to a healthy diet, better food and physical activity choices, and healthy behaviors (i.e., eat more vegetables or fruits, consume less soda and sweetened beverages, engage in more physical activity, increase spice use and decrease salt use, decrease serving sizes including fast food, reduce frequency of consumption of packaged and processed snacks, increase purchasing of fresh foods, and increase use of food labels when selecting foods) [3,10,11,16,[20][21][22][23][24]39,40,42,56,57,59,61,62,67,…”

A Scoping Review of the Validity, Reliability and Conceptual Alignment of Food Literacy Measures for Adults

“…Four were also used to compare food literacy levels between people of different socioeconomic status [19,24,25,28] and five examined the relationship between food literacy and food intake [19,26,28]. Six of the 12 identified tools were used to evaluate the effectiveness of food literacy interventions in Australia [20,21,27], Switzerland [16], Canada [22] and the United Kingdom [23].…”

“…Three studies [20,21,23] used their tool with a high proportion of participants from a low socio-economic background. Four studies were undertaken in Australia [20,21,27,28], five in Europe (France [25], Italy [17], the Netherlands [26], Switzerland [16], the United Kingdom [23]), one in Canada [22] and two were in the United States [19,24].…”

“…Six tools [17,21,24,26,27,28] captured all four domains of food literacy (i.e., planning and management, selection, preparation, and eating). Among these, the tools used by Begley et al [21], Lahne et al [24], Palumbo et al [17], Poelman et al [26] and Wijayaratne et al [28] were the most comprehensive, addressing seven or more of the 11 food literacy components.…”

“…Among these, the tools used by Begley et al [21], Lahne et al [24], Palumbo et al [17], Poelman et al [26] and Wijayaratne et al [28] were the most comprehensive, addressing seven or more of the 11 food literacy components. Component 3.1 was the most frequently included by the food literacy measures ( n = 10) [17,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28], while 3.2 [17,21] and 4.3 [24,26] were only captured in two tools. Overall, almost all tools included items to evaluate ‘preparation’ ( n = 10) and most assessed ‘selection’ ( n = 8) and ‘eating’ ( n = 7).…”