Communication, Media and Film, Social Sciences Building, Room 320, 618 Campus Place NW, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada.
Clinical Epidemiology and Health Care Research, Institute for Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, 4th Floor, 155 College St, Toronto, ON, M5T 3M6, Canada.
Appetite. 2017 Sep 1;116:365-371. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2017.05.007. Epub 2017 May 6.
The term "food literacy" describes the idea of proficiency in food related skills and knowledge. This prevalent term is broadly applied, although its core elements vary from initiative to initiative. In light of its ubiquitous use-but varying definitions-this article establishes the scope of food literacy research by identifying all articles that define 'food literacy', analysing its key conceptualizations, and reporting outcomes/measures of this concept.
A scoping review was conducted to identify all articles (academic and grey literature) using the term "food literacy". Databases included Medline, Pubmed, Embase, CAB Abstracts, CINAHL, Scopus, JSTOR, and Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Of 1049 abstracts, 67 studies were included. From these, data was extracted on country of origin, study type (methodological approach), primary target population, and the primary outcomes relating to food literacy.
The majority of definitions of food literacy emphasize the acquisition of critical knowledge (information and understanding) (55%) over functional knowledge (skills, abilities and choices) (8%), although some incorporate both (37%). Thematic analysis of 38 novel definitions of food literacy reveals the prevalence of six themes: skills and behaviours, food/health choices, culture, knowledge, emotions, and food systems. Study outcomes largely focus on knowledge generating measures, with very few focusing on health related outcome measures.
Current definitions of food literacy incorporate components of six key themes or domains and attributes of both critical and functional knowledge. Despite this broad definition of the term, most studies aiming to improve food literacy focus on knowledge related outcomes. Few articles address health outcomes, leaving an important gap (and opportunity) for future research in this field.
“食品素养”一词描述了与食品相关技能和知识的熟练程度。虽然其核心要素因倡议而异，但这个流行的术语被广泛应用。鉴于其普遍的使用——但定义各不相同——本文通过确定所有定义“食品素养”的文章，分析其关键概念化，并报告这一概念的结果/衡量标准，来确定食品素养研究的范围。
进行了范围审查，以确定使用术语“食品素养”的所有文章（学术和灰色文献）。数据库包括 Medline、Pubmed、Embase、CAB 摘要、CINAHL、Scopus、JSTOR 和 Web of Science 以及 Google Scholar。在 1049 篇摘要中，有 67 项研究被纳入。从中提取了有关国家/地区、研究类型（方法学方法）、主要目标人群以及与食品素养相关的主要结果的数据。
食品素养的大多数定义都强调批判性知识（信息和理解）（55%）的获取，而不是功能性知识（技能、能力和选择）（8%），尽管有些定义包含两者（37%）。对 38 个食品素养新定义的主题分析揭示了六个主题的流行：技能和行为、食品/健康选择、文化、知识、情感和食品系统。研究结果主要集中在产生知识的衡量措施上，很少关注与健康相关的衡量措施。
当前食品素养的定义包含六个关键主题或领域的组成部分，以及批判性和功能性知识的属性。尽管这个术语有广泛的定义，但大多数旨在提高食品素养的研究都侧重于知识相关的结果。很少有文章涉及健康结果，这为该领域的未来研究留下了一个重要的空白（和机会）。
