Validity, reliability and use of a Kuwait child nutrition knowledge assessment questionnaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the nutritional knowledge of children in Kuwait and school-based nutrition interventions are scarce. No validated tool to assess the nutrition knowledge of schoolchildren in Kuwait is available. AIMS: This study determined the validity and reliability of a nutrition knowledge questionnaire in Kuwaiti primary-school children, and measured children's nutrition knowledge before and after a nutrition awareness intervention. METHODS: The questionnaire included five questions to measure nutritional knowledge. The face and content validity were assessed by nutrition and paediatric experts. To assess questionnaire reliability and nutrition knowledge, 642 schoolchildren (8-12 years) were assigned to an intervention, control or reliability group. Each group completed the questionnaire twice, one or two weeks apart. Students in the intervention group attended a nutrition knowledge presentation before completing the questionnaire the second time. Independent and paired samples t-tests were used to assess score differences between and within the intervention and control groups for changes in nutrition knowledge. Pearson correlation coefficients were used to measure score consistency in the reliability group. RESULTS: Overall, the questionnaire had good content validity and moderate to strong reliability (r = 0.44, P < 0.001). Students in the intervention group had significantly higher mean nutritional knowledge scores after the intervention (from 3.65 (SD 1.03) to 4.20 (SD 1.02); P = 0.17). Control group scores were mostly unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: The Kuwait child nutrition knowledge questionnaire is a valid and reliable tool to assess nutritional knowledge in schoolchildren in Kuwait. Nutrition knowledge of Kuwaiti schoolchildren should be improved using age-appropriate interventions in school.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".