Your privacy, your choice

We use essential cookies to make sure the site can function. We also use optional cookies for advertising, personalisation of content, usage analysis, and social media.

By accepting optional cookies, you consent to the processing of your personal data - including transfers to third parties. Some third parties are outside of the European Economic Area, with varying standards of data protection.

See our privacy policy for more information on the use of your personal data.

for further information and to change your choices.

You are viewing the site in preview mode

Skip to main content

Table 2 Perceptions related to integration of nutrigenomics - survey

From: Exploring the future of nutrigenomics: dietitians’ perceptions on integration in Indian practice

 

Integrator

n (%)

Non-integrator

n (%)

p-value

Pre-existing nutrigenomics awareness

   

Have you or Would you consider getting a genetic test for yourself? (n = 249)

0.639

Yes

61 (75.3)

125 (74.4)

 

No

3 (3.7)

11 (6.5)

Maybe

17 (21)

32 (19)

Have you heard of the term ‘Nutrigenomics’ before? (n = 249)

-

Yes

79 (97.5)

163 (97)

 

No

2 (2.5)

5 (3)

Was Nutrigenomics taught as a part of your qualification? (n = 249)

0.359

Yes

46 (56.8)

85 (50.6)

 

No

35 (43.2)

83 (49.4)

Provided counselling to clients/patients related to nutrigenomics in the past year? (n = 249)

 

0.151

Yes

32 (39.5)

51 (30.4)

 

No

49 (60.5)

117 (69.6)

Read scientific literature related to nutrigenomics in the past year. (n = 249)

0.191

Yes

57 (70.4)

131 (78)

 

No

24 (29.6)

37 (22)

Interested in learning more about Nutrigenomics (n = 249)

  

0.094

Yes

75 (92.6)

143 (85.1)

 

Maybe

6 (7.4)

25 (14.9)

How important do you think genetic testing is in the medical/health industry? (n = 249)

-

Not important

0 (0)

2 (1.2)

 

Important

81 (100)

166 (98.8)

How equipped are dietitians/nutritionists to provide nutrigenomics counselling? (n = 249)

0.959

Not equipped

38 (46.9)

78 (46.4)

 

Neutral

37 (45.7)

79 (47)

Equipped

6 (7.4)

11 (6.5)

Likeliness to change aspects of your practice due to new knowledge regarding nutrigenomics? (n = 249)

0.153

Likely

43 (53.1)

73 (43.5)

 

Not likely

38 (46.9)

95 (56.5)

Perceived Benefits of Application of Nutrigenomics

Greater individualization of diet prescription (personal nutrition.) (n = 249)

0.410

Disagree

3 (3.7)

4 (2.4)

 

Neutral

6 (7.4)

21 (12.5)

 

Agree

72 (88.9)

143 (85.1)

 

Stronger foundations for nutrition. (n = 249)

0.013 a

Disagree

1 (1.2)

3 (1.8)

 

Neutral

18 (22.2)

15 (8.9)

 

Agree

62 (76.5)

150 (89.3)

 

Dietary prescriptions that would effectively manage or prevent certain diseases. (n = 249)

0.064

Disagree

8 (9.9)

6 (3.6)

 

Neutral

25 (30.9)

43 (25.6)

 

Agree

48 (59.3)

119 (70.8)

 

Perceived Consumer Motivators Affecting the Implementation of Nutrigenomics

Motivated by desire to prevent or manage disease. (n = 249)

0.011 a

Disagree

9 (11.1)

5 (3.0)

 

Neutral

23 (28.4)

37 (22)

 

Agree

49 (60.5)

126 (75)

 

Prevent a disease based on family history. (n = 249)

0.005 a

Disagree

4 (4.9)

0 (0)

 

Neutral

17 (21)

24 (14.3)

 

Agree

60 (74.1)

144 (85.7)

 

Control health outcomes based on family history. (n = 249)

  

0.054

Disagree

5 (6.2)

6 (3.6)

 

Neutral

29 (35.8)

39 (23.2)

 

Agree

47 (58)

123 (73.2)

 

Improve overall health-related quality of life. (n = 249)

  

0.266

Disagree

4 (4.9)

3 (1.8)

 

Neutral

18 (22.2)

31 (18.5)

 

Agree

59 (72.8)

134 (79.8)

 

Perceived Barriers Affecting the Implementation of Nutrigenomics

   

Cost concerns. (n = 249)

  

0.000 a

Disagree

15 (18.5)

13 (7.7)

 

Neutral

33 (40.7)

41 (24.4)

 

Agree

33 (40.7)

114 (67.9)

 

Not enough experts to convey professional expertise. (n = 249)

  

0.000 a

Disagree

8 (9.9)

1 (0.6)

 

Neutral

19 (23.5)

22 (13.1)

 

Agree

54 (66.7)

145 (86.3)

 

Lack of Continuing Education for Healthcare Professionals. (n = 249)

  

0.003 a

Disagree

10 (12.3)

14 (8.3)

 

Neutral

29 (35.8)

31 (18.5)

 

Agree

42 (51.9)

123 (73.2)

 

Lack of Continuing Education for Consumers. (n = 249)

  

0.003 a

Disagree

6 (7.4)

3 (1.8)

 

Neutral

25 (30.9)

30 (17.9)

 

Agree

50 (61.7)

135 (80.4)

 

Limited access to Nutrigenomics for clients or patients. (n = 249)

  

0.000 a

Disagree

6 (7.4)

5 (3)

 

Neutral

24 (29.6)

20 (11.9)

 

Agree

51 (63)

143 (85.1)

 

Confidentiality issues. (n = 249)

  

0.002 a

Disagree

9 (11.1)

17 (10.1)

 

Neutral

27 (33.3)

24 (14.3)

 

Agree

45 (55.6)

127 (75.6)

 

Moral concerns (n = 249)

  

0.044 a

Disagree

9 (11.1)

17 (10.1)

 

Neutral

26 (32.1)

31 (18.5)

 

Agree

46 (56.8)

120 (71.4)

 

Too many environmental influences to give a definite connection between the effect of nutrition on disease progression. (n = 249)

0.034 a

Disagree

4 (4.9)

9 (5.4)

 

Neutral

31 (38.3)

38 (22.6)

 

Agree

46 (56.8)

121 (72)

 

Lack of clinical trials to prove efficacy of personalized interventions. (n = 249)

0.013 a

Disagree

7 (8.6)

4 (2.4)

 

Neutral

27 (33.3)

40 (23.8)

 

Agree

47 (58)

124 (73.8)

 
  1. ap value using χ2 or Fisher’s exact tests, as appropriate, p < 0.05 considered statistically significant