Knowledge, attitude and behaviour of university students regarding salt and iodine: a multicentre cross-sectional study in six countries in Europe and Asia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Strategies to reduce salt intake are encouraged to be implemented in parallel with those that aim to ensure iodine adequacy at the population level. The aim of the present study was to assess and compare knowledge, attitudes and behaviours related to salt and iodine among students in Europe and Asia. METHODS: A multicentre cross-sectional study was conducted with 2459 university students in total (42.7% males, median age 21 years) from four countries in Europe and two countries in Asia. Data were collected with the use of a self-administered questionnaire, and univariate and multivariate statistical analyses were performed to explore any association between variables. RESULTS: Only 6.5% of all participants knew the correct salt recommendations. Nearly a quarter of them (24.4%) found salt recommendations confusing and/or contradictory. There were significant differences between European and Asian participants, with those from Europe being better informed about salt recommendations, but significantly less knowledgeable about iodine. The reported frequency of use of salt and salt-containing sauces either at the table or for cooking, as well as knowledge about ways to reduce salt intake among those who indicated to make conscious efforts to do so, differed significantly between countries. Significant differences between countries were also observed with respect to the type of salt used, with about one third of all participants (34%) not being aware of the kind of salt they used. CONCLUSION: The results of this survey highlight serious salt- and iodine-related knowledge gaps among university students in Europe and Asia. Raising awareness and conducting information campaigns is needed to promote changes in behaviour that would result in a reduction of salt intake and conscious use of iodised salt at the individual level.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".