|
2009, Volume 15 No. 2
ARTICLE 8
Relation of Dietary Fat Intake Perception to Nutritional Status and Psychosocial Factors
Yong HY, Zalilah MS & Yap LD
Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 Serdang
Selangor, Malaysia
ABSTRACT
Excess dietary fat intake is associated with many chronic diseases. This
cross-sectional study determines the differences in nutritional status and diet-related
psychosocial factors by accuracy levels of dietary fat intake perceptions among
adults. A total of 202 Universiti Putra Malaysia staff (20-55 years old) volunteered
to participate in the study. Dietary fat accuracy levels (under-estimate, accurate
and over-estimate) were determined by assessing actual fat intake through 24-hour diet recall and self-rated fat intake. Diet-related psychosocial factors assessed
were perceived risks, intention to change, outcome expectancies and perceived
barriers. About half (49.5%) of the respondents were classified as accurate
estimators, while 35.6% and 14.9% were under-estimators and over-estimators,
respectively. Dietary fat intake differed significantly between the dietary fat
accuracy groups with under-estimators having the highest amount of dietary fat
intake (F=17.10; p<0.001) and percentage of fat calories (F=103.99 + 0.533%,
p<0.001). Over-estimators had the highest mean BMI (F=3.11, p<0.05) compared
to other groups. Among the fat accuracy groups, under-estimators reported the
least barriers to eating low fat foods (F= 3.671, p<0.05). There were no significant
differences in waist circumference, energy intake, perceived disease risks,
intention to change and outcome expectancies among the dietary fat accuracy
groups. These findings suggest that inaccurate perceptions of dietary fat intake
should not be overlooked as one of the cognitive barriers to dietary change and
factors that influence nutritional status among adults.
Full Article >>
|
|
 |
|
March 1995, Vol1 No.1
September 1995, Vol1 No.2
March 1996, Vol2 No.1
September 1996, Vol2 No.2
March 1997, Vol3 No.1
September 1997, Vol3 No.2
December 1998, Vol4 No.1&2
December 1999, Vol5 No.1&2
March 2000, Vol6 No.1
September 2000, Vol6 No.2
Mar/Sept 2001, Vol7 No.1&2
March 2002, Vol8, No.1
September 2002, Vol8, No.2
March 2003, Vol9 No.1
September 2003, Vol9 No.2
March 2004, Vol10 No.1
September 2004, Vol10 No. 2
2005, Vol 11 No.1
2005, Vo l11 No.2
2006, Vol 12 No.1
2006, Vol 12 No.2
2007, Vol 13 No.1
2007, Vol 13 No.2
March 2008, Vol 14 No.1
2008, Vol 14 No.2
2009, Vol 15 No.1
2009, Vol 15 No.2
2010, Vol 16(1)
2010, Vol 16(2)
2010, Vol 16(3)
2011, Vol 17(1)
2011, Vol 17(2)
2011, Vol 17(3)
|
|
|
|