Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Systematic review of instruments for assessing culinary skills in adults: What is the quality of their psychometric properties?

View ORCID ProfileAline Rissatto Teixeira, View ORCID ProfileDaniela Bicalho, View ORCID ProfileBetzabeth Slater, View ORCID Profilede Mendonça Lima Tacio
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.12.20129668
Aline Rissatto Teixeira
1Department of Nutrition and Public Health, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Aline Rissatto Teixeira
  • For correspondence: alinert{at}usp.br
Daniela Bicalho
1Department of Nutrition and Public Health, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Daniela Bicalho
Betzabeth Slater
1Department of Nutrition and Public Health, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Betzabeth Slater
de Mendonça Lima Tacio
2Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for de Mendonça Lima Tacio
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background Culinary skills are important objects of study in the field of Public Health. Studies that propose to develop instruments for assessing such construct show lack of methodological uniformity to report validity and reliability of their instruments.

Objective To identify studies that have developed instruments to measure culinary skills in adult population, and critically assess their psychometric properties.

Design We conducted a systematic review according to the PRISMA statement. We searched literature PubMed/Medline, Scopus, LILACS, and Web of Science databases until January 2021, and consulted Google Scholar for relevant grey literature. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, conducted data extraction, and assessed the psychometric quality of the instruments. A third reviewer resolved any doubts or disagreements in all steps of the systematic review.

Results The search identified 1148 potentially relevant studies, out of which 9 met the inclusion criteria. In addition, we included 3 studies by searching the related articles and the reference lists of these studies, totaling 12 included studies in this review. Ten studies reported the development of tools measuring culinary skills in adults and 2 studies performed cross-cultural adaptations of original instruments. We considered adequate quality of internal consistency reliability in four studies. One study received adequate rating for test-retest reliability. No studies presented adequate rating for content validity and four studies showed satisfactory results for at least one type of construct validity. One study reported criterion validity and the quality of this psychometric property was inadequate.

Conclusions We identified many studies that surveyed culinary skills. Although the isolated measures appraised in this review show good promise in terms of quality of psychometric properties, no studies presented adequate measures for each aspect of reliability and validity. A more consistent and consensual definition of culinary skills is recommended. The flaws observed in these studies show that there is a need for ongoing research in the area of the psychometric properties of instruments assessing culinary skills.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by the Sao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP: http://www.fapesp.br/), process number 2019/14348-5. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Not Applicable

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Data Availability

All data underlying the findings described fully available, without restriction. All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted August 09, 2021.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Systematic review of instruments for assessing culinary skills in adults: What is the quality of their psychometric properties?
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Systematic review of instruments for assessing culinary skills in adults: What is the quality of their psychometric properties?
Aline Rissatto Teixeira, Daniela Bicalho, Betzabeth Slater, de Mendonça Lima Tacio
medRxiv 2020.06.12.20129668; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.12.20129668
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Systematic review of instruments for assessing culinary skills in adults: What is the quality of their psychometric properties?
Aline Rissatto Teixeira, Daniela Bicalho, Betzabeth Slater, de Mendonça Lima Tacio
medRxiv 2020.06.12.20129668; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.12.20129668

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Public and Global Health
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (349)
  • Allergy and Immunology (668)
  • Allergy and Immunology (668)
  • Anesthesia (181)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (2648)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (316)
  • Dermatology (223)
  • Emergency Medicine (399)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (942)
  • Epidemiology (12228)
  • Forensic Medicine (10)
  • Gastroenterology (759)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (4103)
  • Geriatric Medicine (387)
  • Health Economics (680)
  • Health Informatics (2657)
  • Health Policy (1005)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (985)
  • Hematology (363)
  • HIV/AIDS (851)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (13695)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (797)
  • Medical Education (399)
  • Medical Ethics (109)
  • Nephrology (436)
  • Neurology (3882)
  • Nursing (209)
  • Nutrition (577)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (739)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (695)
  • Oncology (2030)
  • Ophthalmology (585)
  • Orthopedics (240)
  • Otolaryngology (306)
  • Pain Medicine (250)
  • Palliative Medicine (75)
  • Pathology (473)
  • Pediatrics (1115)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (466)
  • Primary Care Research (452)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (3432)
  • Public and Global Health (6527)
  • Radiology and Imaging (1403)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (814)
  • Respiratory Medicine (871)
  • Rheumatology (409)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (410)
  • Sports Medicine (342)
  • Surgery (448)
  • Toxicology (53)
  • Transplantation (185)
  • Urology (165)