Cross-sectional analysis shows the lack of significant link between knowledge and SSB consumption frequency in adults, suggesting other factors may play a role.
Consumption of Sugar Sweetened Beverages (SSBs) is associated with an increased risk of various health issues, such as obesity, type 2 diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. One significant factor contributing to the frequency of SSB consumption is individual knowledge. Nutrition knowledge plays a crucial role in influencing eating behaviors and decisions. This study aimed to analyze the relationship between knowledge and the frequency of SSB consumption among adults. The study utilized a quantitative descriptive approach with a cross-sectional research design, involving 158 respondents aged 19-29 years from Kepulauan Riau. Data were collected through a Google form that assessed respondents' knowledge of SSBs and their frequency of consumption. The relationship between knowledge (independent variable) and SSB consumption frequency (dependent variable) was analyzed using Spearman's rank test. The results revealed no significant relationship between knowledge and the frequency of SSB consumption (p = 0.756). Among respondents with good knowledge of SSBs, 74 respondents (50.3%) reported rarely consuming SSBs, while 73 respondents (49.7%) with good knowledge also had frequent consumption habits. These findings suggest that while knowledge of the negative effects of SSBs was present, it did not necessarily translate into healthier consumption patterns. Despite these results, the study indicates that further research is needed to explore other factors that may influence SSB consumption. These factors could include psychological, environmental, or socio-economic influences that may play a more significant role in shaping consumption behavior. Understanding these factors is crucial for developing more effective interventions to reduce the health risks associated with excessive SSB consumption.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Herviana et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: