Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Nutrients. 2017 Feb 21;9(2). pii: E172. doi: 10.3390/nu9020172.

Validity and Reliability of General Nutrition Knowledge Questionnaire for Adults in Uganda.

Author information

1
Division of Nutritional Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA. bukenya2@illinois.edu.
2
Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA. ahmed36@illinois.edu.
3
School of Family and Consumer Sciences, Eastern Illinois University, Charleston, IL 61920, USA. jmevans@eiu.edu.
4
Division of Nutritional Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA. dgrigs1@illinois.edu.
5
Department of Kinesiology and Community Health, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA. dgrigs1@illinois.edu.
6
Department of Food Technology and Human Nutrition, Makerere University, P.O. Box 7062, Kampala, Uganda. hmuyonga@yahoo.com.
7
Division of Nutritional Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA. jandrade@illinois.edu.
8
Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA. jandrade@illinois.edu.

Abstract

This study sought to develop and validate a general nutrition knowledge questionnaire (GNKQ) for Ugandan adults. The initial draft consisted of 133 items on five constructs associated with nutrition knowledge; expert recommendations (16 items), food groups (70 items), selecting food (10 items), nutrition and disease relationship (23 items), and food fortification in Uganda (14 items). The questionnaire validity was evaluated in three studies. For the content validity (study 1), a panel of five content matter nutrition experts reviewed the GNKQ draft before and after face validity. For the face validity (study 2), head teachers and health workers (n = 27) completed the questionnaire before attending one of three focus groups to review the clarity of the items. For the construct and test-rest reliability (study 3), head teachers (n = 40) from private and public primary schools and nutrition (n = 52) and engineering (n = 49) students from Makerere University took the questionnaire twice (two weeks apart). Experts agreed (content validity index, CVI > 0.9; reliability, Gwet's AC1 > 0.85) that all constructs were relevant to evaluate nutrition knowledge. After the focus groups, 29 items were identified as unclear, requiring major (n = 5) and minor (n = 24) reviews. The final questionnaire had acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach α > 0.95), test-retest reliability (r = 0.89), and differentiated (p < 0.001) nutrition knowledge scores between nutrition (67 ± 5) and engineering (39 ± 11) students. Only the construct on nutrition recommendations was unreliable (Cronbach α = 0.51, test-retest r = 0.55), which requires further optimization. The final questionnaire included topics on food groups (41 items), selecting food (2 items), nutrition and disease relationship (14 items), and food fortification in Uganda (22 items) and had good content, construct, and test-retest reliability to evaluate nutrition knowledge among Ugandan adults.

KEYWORDS:

Uganda; adults; nutrition knowledge questionnaire; validation

PMID:
28230779
PMCID:
PMC5331603
DOI:
10.3390/nu9020172
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI) Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center