Misconceptions of Fruit and Vegetable Consumption: Differences between Objective and Subjective Estimation of Intake
References (38)
- et al.
5 a day for better health: a new research initiative
J Am Diet Assoc
(1994) - et al.
Psychosocial determinants of fruit and vegetable consumption among adults: results of focus group interviews
Food Qual Pref
(1995) - et al.
Psychosocial determinants of fruit and vegetable consumption
Appetite
(1995) - et al.
Increasing fruit and vegetable consumption among 4th and 5th grade students: results from focus groups using reciprocal determinism
J Nutr Educ
(1993) - et al.
Self-rated dietary fat intake: association with objective assessment of fat, psychosocial factors, and intention to change
J Nutr Educ
(1994) - et al.
Self-efficacy as an important determinant of quitting among pregnant woman who smoke: the Ø-pattern
Prev Med
(1994) The theory of planned behavior
Organ Behav Hum Dec
(1991)- et al.
A review of selected studies assessing social-psychological determinants of fat and cholesterol intake
Food Qual Pref
(1991) - et al.
The impact of a computer-tailored nutrition intervention
Prev Med
(1996) - et al.
Fruit, vegetables, and cancer prevention: a review of the epidemiological evidence
Nutr Cancer
(1992)
Nutritional approach to cancer prevention with emphasis on vitamins, antioxidants and carotenoids
Am J Clin Nutr
Potential role of beta-carotene in the prevention of cardio vascular disease
Int J Vitam Nutr Res
Dietary antioxidant flavonoids and risk of coronary heart disease:The Zutphen Elderly Study
Lancet
One apple a day? Fruit and vegetable intake in the West of Scotland
Health Educ Res
Overview of dietary recommendations on diet and cancer
Cited by (109)
Husband Support Mediates the Association between Self-Efficacy and Cervical Cancer Screening among Women in the Rural Area of Indonesia
2021, Asia-Pacific Journal of Oncology NursingEmotion suppression, coping strategies, dietary patterns, and BMI
2021, Eating BehaviorsCitation Excerpt :The EE scale used in this study was designed and validated for children and adolescents, which may limit generalizations made to adult populations (Tanofsky-Kraff et al., 2008). Additionally, the self-reported data gathered on PA (Hagstromer et al., 2010), dietary intake (Lechner, Brug, & De Vries, 1997; Neuhouser, Kristal, McLerran, Patterson, & Atkinson, 1999), and height and weight (Mozumdar & Liguori, 2016) also present sources of error that yield challenges in being able to reliably extend results, compared to objective measures. However, given the associations that were revealed despite the use of these broad instruments, the use of objective and detailed measurements may help to elaborate on differences between subgroups and how best to address psychological determinants of obesity-related health behavior.
This study was financially supported by a grant from the Dutch Cancer Society.