(1) Background: The term ‘food literacy’ has gained momentum globally; however, a lack of clarity around its definition has resulted in inconsistencies in use of the term. Therefore, the objective was to conduct a systematic scoping review to describe the use, reach, application and definitions of the term ‘food literacy’ over time. (2) Methods: A search was conducted using the PRISMA-ScR guidelines in seven research databases without any date limitations up to 31 December 2019, searching simply for use of the term ‘food literacy’. (3) Results: Five hundred and forty-nine studies were included. The term ‘food literacy’ was used once in 243 articles (44%) and mentioned by researchers working in 41 countries. Original research was the most common article type (n = 429, 78%). Food literacy was published across 72 In Cites disciplines, with 456 (83%) articles from the last 5 years. In articles about food literacy (n = 82, 15%), review articles were twice as prevalent compared to the total number of articles (n = 10, 12% vs. n = 32, 6%). Fifty-one different definitions of food literacy were cited. (4) Conclusions: ‘Food literacy’ has been used frequently and broadly across differing article types and disciplines in academic literature internationally. However, agreement on a standardised definition of food literacy endorsed by a peak international agency is needed in order to progress the field.

Objective: This study aimed to validate a nutrition knowledge questionnaire appropriate for use in Australia.Design: Nutrition knowledge is essential in establishing and maintaining strategies that reduce the burden of disease and promote wellbeing. The General Nutrition Knowledge Questionnaire (GNKQ) was developed in the United Kingdom in 1999 and validated for Australia in 2008. Changes in national nutrition recommendations and food availability prompted the redevelopment and revalidation of the UK questionnaire in 2016. However, the Australian questionnaire had not been subsequently updated.Setting: Australia.Participants: Content validity was determined using a sample of academic dietitians in Australia (n8). Face validity was undertaken with retail employees (n11) whose highest level of education was secondary school. Ninety-three undergraduate nutrition and engineering students at Queensland University of Technology completed the questionnaire for construct validity, and nineteen students were contacted a week later for test–retest reliability.Results: In the 117-scored questionnaire, nutrition students scored consistently higher in each of the four sections and overall (87 %,M102, IQR 95, 107) compared with engineering students (77 %,M82, IQR 76, 87·25,P< 0·01). Internal reliability of the questionnaire was high (α= 0·92) as was test–retest reliability (r_s= 0·96, ICC_2,1= 0·99). AUS-R NKQ determined significant differences between individuals with known higher levels of nutrition knowledge and obtained high validity, reliability and consistency within an Australian sample.Conclusions: AUS-R NKQ refined through this research is valid and would be an appropriate questionnaire for assessing the effectiveness of nutrition knowledge-based interventions for public health programmes, clinicians and researchers.

Background: The term “food literacy” is increasingly used to describe the knowledge, skills and behaviours needed to meet food needs. The aim of this research was to determine content validity for an International Food Literacy Survey. Methods: The literature was searched for existing items to form an item pool to measure the eleven components of food literacy. Expert consensus was investigated through two related online surveys. Round 1 participants were researchers who had been involved in the development of a food literacy measure (n = 18). Round 2 participants were authors of papers who had used the term (n = 85). Level of agreement was determined quantitatively using the Content Validity Index and compared to open ended qualitative comments. Results: Consensus was achieved on 119 items. Components varied in the ease with which existing validated items could be found and the number of items achieving consensus. Items related to food prepared within the home were more likely to achieve consensus. Additional issues included limited shared understanding of the scope of the term, the validity of items varying according to context and a limited health focus. Conclusions: This study provides a valuable basis upon which to progress the development of a measure.

Background: Food literacy is theorised to improve diet quality, nutrition behaviours, social connectedness and food security. The definition and conceptualisation by Vidgen & Gallegos, consisting of 11 theoretical components within the four domains of planning and managing, selecting, preparing and eating, is currently the most highly cited framework. However, a valid and reliable questionnaire is needed to comprehensively measure this conceptualisation. Therefore, this study draws on existing item pools to develop a comprehensive food literacy questionnaire using item response theory. Methods: Five hundred Australian adults were recruited in Study 1 to refine a food literacy item pool using principal component analysis (PCA) and item response theory (IRT) which involved detailed item analysis on targeting, responsiveness, validity and reliability. Another 500 participants were recruited in Study 2 to replicate item analysis on validity and reliability on the refined item pool, and 250 of these participants re-completed the food literacy questionnaire to determine its test–retest reliability. Results: The PCA saw the 171-item pool reduced to 100-items across 19 statistical components of food literacy. After the thresholds of 26 items were combined, responses to the food literacy questionnaire had ordered thresholds (targeting), acceptable item locations (< -0.01 to + 1.53) and appropriateness of the measurement model (n = 92% expected responses) (responsiveness), met outfit mean-squares MSQ (0.48—1.42) (validity) and had high person, item separation (> 0.99) and test–retest (ICC 2,1 0.55–0.88) scores (reliability). Conclusions: We developed a 100-item food literacy questionnaire, the IFLQ-19 to comprehensively address the Vidgen & Gallegos theoretical domains and components with good targeting, responsiveness, reliability and validity in a diverse sample of Australian adults.

Interprofessional education (IPE), as preparation for interprofessional practice, is considered essential for quality, coordinated, outcome-focussed patient care. To develop capacity in our future healthcare practitioners, IPE needs to be developed within curricula, and opportunities provided to practise within the placement setting. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of a structured IPE placement program on students’ perceptions of IPE within an authentic healthcare setting. This paper reports on changes in students’ attitudes toward IPE, as measured by the SPICE-R2 instrument, in response to program involvement. Thirty-six students from six health professions participated in the study and reported significantly improved perceptions toward IPE, particularly in their understanding of roles and responsibilities, teamwork, and patient outcomes. The outcomes reinforce the importance of offering intentional and structured IPE activities during placement and the value provided to health students, preparing them for future collaborative practice.

Objective: Food literacy is the knowledge, skills and behaviours needed to meet food needs and determine intake and is conceptualised as eleven components under four domains of planning and managing, selecting, preparing, and eating. Previous measures of food literacy vary in their adherence to the conceptualisation and ability to capture totality of eating. This study aimed to determine items for inclusion and exclusion in a food literacy item pool and capture the general public’s interpretation of everyday food literacy practices.Design: Beginning with an item pool from previous studies, cognitive interviews were conducted using think-aloud and verbal probing methods. Data were first analysed for applicability, clarity, ambiguity and logic, then for emergent themes to ensure items captured the totality of the participant’s eating.Setting: AustraliaParticipants: Australian residents over 18 years of age recruited via Facebook residential groups (n 20).Results: Of the original 116 items, 11 items had limited applicability; 13 items had unclear references; 32 items had lexical problems and 11 items had logical problems. In total, 29 items were deleted, 31 retained and 56 revised. Thematic analysis revealed participants limited their responses to consider only conventional practices such as grocery shopping, cooking and planned meals rather than the totality of their eating. An additional eighty-four items were developed to address eating out, incidental eating occasions and inconsistencies between participants assumed correct knowledge and that of public health guidelines. This resulted in a refined 171-item pool.Conclusions: This study progresses the development towards a comprehensive, validated food literacy questionnaire.