Scholarlink

Purpose <p>Nutrition literacy is an essential competency for physicians, yet nutrition education is variably integrated into undergraduate medical curricula.</p> Methods <p>We conducted a cross-sectional study (2023–2024) at a Turkish public medical faculty comparing first- and third-year medical students. This study was an outcome-based, cross-sectional needs assessment and did not include an educational intervention. Participants completed a sociodemographic/dietary questionnaire and the validated Evaluation Instrument of Nutrition Literacy in Adults (EINLA), assessing general nutrition knowledge, reading comprehension, food group recognition, portion-size estimation, and food-label interpretation. Scores were compared using nonparametric tests. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between academic year and selected binary outcomes (receipt of nutrition information; low daily water intake, 1&#xa0;L/day vs. ≥ 2&#xa0;L/day), adjusting for age, sex, and body mass index.</p> Results <p>Among 430 students (240 first-year, 190 third-year), overall nutritional literacy scores were similar (median 31 [29–33] in both groups; <i>p</i> = 0.160). First-year students scored higher in reading comprehension (6 [5–6] vs. 5.5 [5–6], <i>p</i> = 0.004). Meal skipping rates were comparable, but the skipped meal type differed by year (<i>p</i> = 0.012). In adjusted analyses, first-year students had higher odds of reporting receipt of nutrition information (OR 2.29, 95% CI 1.33–3.95; <i>p</i> = 0.003) and of low water intake (1&#xa0;L/day vs. ≥ 2&#xa0;L/day; OR 2.58, 95% CI 1.44–4.61; <i>p</i> = 0.001).</p> Conclusion <p>Nutritional literacy scores were generally high and similar between first- and third-year students. These findings should be interpreted as a cross-sectional comparison between cohorts rather than as direct evidence of curricular effectiveness. Nutritional literacy assessment may help inform curriculum reflection, clearer documentation of nutrition-related learning opportunities, and future longitudinal assessment.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Nutritional Literacy in Early Medical Education: A Cross-Sectional Comparison of First and Third-Year Medical Students in Turkey

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月20日

查看全文
  • Bengu Depboylu,
  • Fatih Siriken,
  • Hayriye Dilek Akdogan

摘要

Purpose

Nutrition literacy is an essential competency for physicians, yet nutrition education is variably integrated into undergraduate medical curricula.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study (2023–2024) at a Turkish public medical faculty comparing first- and third-year medical students. This study was an outcome-based, cross-sectional needs assessment and did not include an educational intervention. Participants completed a sociodemographic/dietary questionnaire and the validated Evaluation Instrument of Nutrition Literacy in Adults (EINLA), assessing general nutrition knowledge, reading comprehension, food group recognition, portion-size estimation, and food-label interpretation. Scores were compared using nonparametric tests. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between academic year and selected binary outcomes (receipt of nutrition information; low daily water intake, 1 L/day vs. ≥ 2 L/day), adjusting for age, sex, and body mass index.

Results

Among 430 students (240 first-year, 190 third-year), overall nutritional literacy scores were similar (median 31 [29–33] in both groups; p = 0.160). First-year students scored higher in reading comprehension (6 [5–6] vs. 5.5 [5–6], p = 0.004). Meal skipping rates were comparable, but the skipped meal type differed by year (p = 0.012). In adjusted analyses, first-year students had higher odds of reporting receipt of nutrition information (OR 2.29, 95% CI 1.33–3.95; p = 0.003) and of low water intake (1 L/day vs. ≥ 2 L/day; OR 2.58, 95% CI 1.44–4.61; p = 0.001).

Conclusion

Nutritional literacy scores were generally high and similar between first- and third-year students. These findings should be interpreted as a cross-sectional comparison between cohorts rather than as direct evidence of curricular effectiveness. Nutritional literacy assessment may help inform curriculum reflection, clearer documentation of nutrition-related learning opportunities, and future longitudinal assessment.