Predictors of Stakeholders' Intention to Adopt Nutrigenomics

Overview

Journal Genes Nutr

Publisher Biomed Central

Date 2020 Sep 23

PMID 32962632

Citations 5

Authors

Muhammad Adzran Che Mustapa

Latifah Amin

Lynn J Frewer

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Nutrigenomics is an emerging science that studies the relationship between genes, diet and nutrients that can help prevent chronic disease. The development of this science depends on whether the public accept its application; therefore, predicting their intention to adopt it is important for its successful implementation.

Objective: This study aims to analyse Malaysian stakeholders' intentions to adopt nutrigenomics, and determines the factors that influence their intentions.

Methods: A survey was conducted based on the responses of 421 adults (aged 18 years and older) and comprising two stakeholder groups: healthcare providers (n = 221) and patients (n = 200) who were located in the Klang Valley, Malaysia. The SPSS software was used to analyse the descriptive statistics of intention to adopt nutrigenomics and the SmartPLS software was used to determine the predicting factors affecting their decisions to adopt nutrigenomics.

Results: The results show that the stakeholders perceived the benefits of nutrigenomics as outweighing its risks, suggesting that the perceived benefits represent the most important direct predictor of the intention to adopt nutrigenomics. The perceived risks of nutrigenomics, trust in key players, engagement with medical genetics and religiosity also predict the intention to adopt nutrigenomics. Additionally, the perceived benefits of nutrigenomics served as a mediator for four factors: perceived risks of nutrigenomics, engagement with medical genetics, trust in key players and religiosity, whilst the perceived risks were a mediator for engagement with medical genetics.

Conclusion: The findings of this study suggest that the intentions of Malaysian stakeholders to adopt nutrigenomics are a complex decision-making process where all the previously mentioned factors interact. Although the results showed that the stakeholders in Malaysia were highly positive towards nutrigenomics, they were also cautious about adopting it.

Citing Articles

The Effectiveness of Educational Intervention in Promoting Preventive Behaviors of Dengue Fever in Southern Iran: Applying Health Belief Model (HBM).

Yari A, Mohseni S, Ezati Rad R, Hosseini Z, Shahabi N, Aghamolaei T Health Sci Rep. 2024; 7(12):e70198.

PMID: 39624618 PMC: 11609999. DOI: 10.1002/hsr2.70198.

Habits, Health and Environment in the Purchase of Bakery Products: Consumption Preferences and Sustainable Inclinations before and during COVID-19.

Nicolosi A, Lagana V, Di Gregorio D Foods. 2023; 12(8).

PMID: 37107456 PMC: 10138246. DOI: 10.3390/foods12081661.

Implementation of Nutrigenetics and Nutrigenomics Research and Training Activities for Developing Precision Nutrition Strategies in Malaysia.

Dhanapal A, Wuni R, Ventura E, Chiet T, Cheah E, Loganathan A Nutrients. 2022; 14(23).

PMID: 36501140 PMC: 9740135. DOI: 10.3390/nu14235108.

Research gaps and opportunities in precision nutrition: an NIH workshop report.

Lee B, Ordovas J, Parks E, Anderson C, Barabasi A, Clinton S Am J Clin Nutr. 2022; 116(6):1877-1900.

PMID: 36055772 PMC: 9761773. DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/nqac237.

Determinants of stakeholders' attitudes and intentions toward supporting the use of Wolbachia-infected Aedes mosquitoes for dengue control.

Arham A, Amin L, Mustapa M, Mahadi Z, Yaacob M, Ibrahim M BMC Public Health. 2021; 21(1):2314.

PMID: 34949167 PMC: 8697497. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-021-12166-w.

References

Nielsen D, Shih S, El-Sohemy A . Perceptions of genetic testing for personalized nutrition: a randomized trial of DNA-based dietary advice. J Nutrigenet Nutrigenomics. 2014; 7(2):94-104. DOI: 10.1159/000365508. View

Adams S, Anthony J, Carvajal R, Chae L, Khoo C, Latulippe M . Perspective: Guiding Principles for the Implementation of Personalized Nutrition Approaches That Benefit Health and Function. Adv Nutr. 2019; 11(1):25-34. PMC: 7442375. DOI: 10.1093/advances/nmz086. View

Amin L, Hashim H, Mahadi Z, Ismail K . Determinants of the willingness to participate in biobanking among Malaysian stakeholders in the Klang Valley. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018; 18(1):163. PMC: 6282379. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-018-0619-2. View

Loewenstein G, Weber E, Hsee C, Welch N . Risk as feelings. Psychol Bull. 2001; 127(2):267-86. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.267. View

Hann K, Freeman M, Fraser L, Waller J, Sanderson S, Rahman B . Awareness, knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes towards genetic testing for cancer risk among ethnic minority groups: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2017; 17(1):503. PMC: 5445407. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-017-4375-8. View

Celis-Morales C, Marsaux C, Livingstone K, Navas-Carretero S, San-Cristobal R, Fallaize R . Can genetic-based advice help you lose weight? Findings from the Food4Me European randomized controlled trial. Am J Clin Nutr. 2017; 105(5):1204-1213. DOI: 10.3945/ajcn.116.145680. View

Chatters L . Religion and health: public health research and practice. Annu Rev Public Health. 2000; 21:335-67. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.21.1.335. View

Bech-Larsen T, Grunert K . The perceived healthiness of functional foods. A conjoint study of Danish, Finnish and American consumers' perception of functional foods. Appetite. 2003; 40(1):9-14. DOI: 10.1016/s0195-6663(02)00171-x. View

Sales N, Pelegrini P, Goersch M . Nutrigenomics: definitions and advances of this new science. J Nutr Metab. 2014; 2014:202759. PMC: 3984860. DOI: 10.1155/2014/202759. View

10.

Amin L, Azad M, Gausmian M, Zulkifli F . Determinants of public attitudes to genetically modified salmon. PLoS One. 2014; 9(1):e86174. PMC: 3906022. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0086174. View

11.

Giles E, Kuznesof S, Clark B, Hubbard C, Frewer L . Consumer acceptance of and willingness to pay for food nanotechnology: a systematic review. J Nanopart Res. 2015; 17(12):467. PMC: 4666279. DOI: 10.1007/s11051-015-3270-4. View

12.

Ronteltap A, Van Trijp J, Renes R, Frewer L . Consumer acceptance of technology-based food innovations: lessons for the future of nutrigenomics. Appetite. 2007; 49(1):1-17. DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2007.02.002. View

13.

Einsiedel E . Cloning and its discontents-a Canadian perspective. Nat Biotechnol. 2000; 18(9):943-4. DOI: 10.1038/79419. View

14.

Cherkas L, Harris J, Levinson E, Spector T, Prainsack B . A survey of UK public interest in internet-based personal genome testing. PLoS One. 2010; 5(10):e13473. PMC: 2957412. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0013473. View

15.

Poinhos R, Oliveira B, van der Lans I, Fischer A, Berezowska A, Rankin A . Providing Personalised Nutrition: Consumers' Trust and Preferences Regarding Sources of Information, Service Providers and Regulators, and Communication Channels. Public Health Genomics. 2017; 20(4):218-228. DOI: 10.1159/000481357. View

16.

Fenech M, El-Sohemy A, Cahill L, Ferguson L, French T, Tai E . Nutrigenetics and nutrigenomics: viewpoints on the current status and applications in nutrition research and practice. J Nutrigenet Nutrigenomics. 2011; 4(2):69-89. PMC: 3121546. DOI: 10.1159/000327772. View

17.

Ghosh D . Personalised food: how personal is it?. Genes Nutr. 2009; 5(1):51-3. PMC: 2820193. DOI: 10.1007/s12263-009-0139-0. View

18.

Elsamanoudy A, Mohamed Neamat-Allah M, Hisham Mohammad F, Hassanien M, Nada H . The role of nutrition related genes and nutrigenetics in understanding the pathogenesis of cancer. J Microsc Ultrastruct. 2018; 4(3):115-122. PMC: 6014201. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmau.2016.02.002. View

19.

MacNICOL A, Wright A, Watson M . Education and attitudes in families with adult polycystic kidney disease. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1991; 6(1):27-30. DOI: 10.1093/ndt/6.1.27. View

20.

Fenech M . Genome health nutrigenomics and nutrigenetics--diagnosis and nutritional treatment of genome damage on an individual basis. Food Chem Toxicol. 2007; 46(4):1365-70. DOI: 10.1016/j.fct.2007.06.035. View