Assessing Intentions to Eat Low-Glycemic Index Foods by Adults with Diabetes Using a New Questionnaire Based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour

Abstract Objective The Canadian Diabetes Association recommends that people with diabetes choose foods with low-glycemic index (GI). This study developed a questionnaire measuring Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) constructs relative to consuming a low-GI diet by people with diabetes so as to achiev...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Canadian journal of diabetes 2015-04, Vol.39 (2), p.94-100
Hauptverfasser: Watanabe, Tomoe, MSc, RD, Berry, Tanya R., PhD, Willows, Noreen D., PhD, Bell, Rhonda C., PhD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract Objective The Canadian Diabetes Association recommends that people with diabetes choose foods with low-glycemic index (GI). This study developed a questionnaire measuring Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) constructs relative to consuming a low-GI diet by people with diabetes so as to achieve a better understanding of which TPB constructs, demographic characteristics and diabetes-related variables best predict intention to consume a low-GI diet. Method A questionnaire to measure intentions to consume a low-GI diet was developed based on TPB constructs and was administered to 369 adults (30 to 75 years) with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Responses were analyzed using multiple linear regression. Results More than 90% of participants (mean age, 56.5±10.8 years; mean body mass index, 30.5±7.2 kg/m2 ) cited reduction and maintenance of healthy blood glucose levels as an advantage of eating low-GI foods. Older age, higher income, female gender, having type 2 diabetes, diabetes treatment (diet only) and understanding of the GI were positively associated with intention to eat a low-GI diet. TPB constructs that significantly predicted intentions to eat a low-GI diet were instrumental attitude (beta = 0.24, p
ISSN:1499-2671
2352-3840
DOI:10.1016/j.jcjd.2014.09.001