[HTML][HTML] On-campus food purchase behaviors, choice determinants, and opinions on food availability in a Spanish university community

N Martinez-Perez, N Telleria-Aramburu, P Insúa… - Nutrition, 2022 - Elsevier
N Martinez-Perez, N Telleria-Aramburu, P Insúa, I Hernández, S Telletxea, L Ansotegui…
Nutrition, 2022Elsevier
Objective The aim of this study was to investigate food purchasing behaviors, choice
determinants, and opinions about on-campus food availability by a university community
and to analyze differences in these aspects between students, education and/or research
staff (ERS), and administrative and services staff (ASS), and between males and females.
Methods This was a cross-sectional study that involved a representative sample of students
(n= 1089), ERS (n= 396), and ASS (n= 300) who completed an anonymous online survey. A …
Objective
The aim of this study was to investigate food purchasing behaviors, choice determinants, and opinions about on-campus food availability by a university community and to analyze differences in these aspects between students, education and/or research staff (ERS), and administrative and services staff (ASS), and between males and females.
Methods
This was a cross-sectional study that involved a representative sample of students (n = 1089), ERS (n = 396), and ASS (n = 300) who completed an anonymous online survey. A previously adapted version of the questionnaire was administered. The results were weighted to ensure representativeness of this community population using weighted coefficients.
Results
The results showed that most of the participants purchased food on campus (91.6%), especially for lunch (67.4% of foods and 37.4% of drinks) and snack (65.4% of foods and 45.4% of drinks). Hot drinks (i.e., coffee, tea, hot chocolate etc.; 60.5%), bottled water (49.2%), and hot foods (i.e., small servings [38.2%] and sandwiches/hamburgers [31.7%]) were the most purchased items. Taste (98.6%) was the most important determinant in choice, followed by price for students, nutritional value for ASS, and health value for ERS. The “top 5” opinions suggested for the campus food environment and potential changes were “greater capacity to access free filtered drinking water”, “greater capacity to recycle food packaging,” “more healthy options in vending machines”, “discounts for healthy choices,” and “allergen labeling.”
Conclusion
Interventions that improve sustainability and the affordability of products with high nutritional quality, price-manipulation directives, and allergen information on labeling would be well received among this community.
Elsevier
以上显示的是最相近的搜索结果。 查看全部搜索结果