Habit, Choice, Intention and Perception of Raw Beef Consumers on Raw Beef Consumption: A Health Risk Management Perspective | BMC Nutrition

0

Study zone

The study was conducted in selected locations in South Wollo (Dessie, Kombolcha and Wereilu) and Oromia (Kemissie and Bati) zones. The South Wollo and Oromia areas are in the Amhara Regional State with the geographic coordinates of 10.8997°N, 38.9877°E and 10.3959°N, 40.0000°E, respectively. The South Wollo and Oromia zones are located in the northeastern part of Ethiopia, 401 and 327 km respectively from Addis Ababa (the capital of Ethiopia). The South Wollo and Oromia zones cover an area of ​​17,067.45 km2and 286,612 km2respectively.

Study population

South Wollo and Oromia zones have a total population of 2,518,862 and 457,278 respectively [11]. The study population consisted of consumers of raw beef in certain raw beef restaurants. For the assessment of eating behavior, all age groups over 18 and both sexes were included. A total of 570 raw beef consumers were interviewed. The majority (70.18%) of the participants came from the south of Wollo (35.09% in Dessie, 26.32% in Kombolcha and 8.77% in Wereilu) and the others (29.82%) came from the area Oromia (17.54% in Kemissie and 12.28 in Bati).

study design

A cross-sectional study (a study that examines a situation at a given time) was carried out from January 2021 to September 2021 in selected towns and villages in South Wollo and Oromia zones to assess raw beef consumption behavior vintages. beef consumers. In this study, descriptive and inferential statistics were used.

Sample size and data collection techniques

The sample size for eating behavior was made based on suggestions from Taherdoost’s formula [12]. Taherdoost and his research team suggested that for each type of cross-sectional survey, the following formula is more appropriate than the others.

$$n=frac{p left(100-pright) {z}^2}{e^2}$$

Where n = is the required sample size.

p = is the percentage of occurrence of a state or condition.

z = is the value corresponding to the level of confidence required.

e = is the maximum percentage error required.

Since there was no prior assessment of raw beef consumption behavior in the study areas, 50% for p-value, 95% (1.96) for z-value and 5% for e-value were taken. Accordingly, the sample size was calculated as follows.

$$n=frac{50left(100-50right){1.96}^2}{5^2}$$

$$=384;mathrm{minimum};mathrm{samples};mathrm{were};mathrm{required}$$

Even though the minimum sample size is 384, the researchers collected a larger number of samples (570). The total sample sizes of Dessie, Kombolcha, Kemise, Bati and Werielu were 200, 150, 100, 70 and 50, respectively.

Questionnaire-structured interviews were conducted to assess the raw beef consumption behavior of raw beef consumers. The tables of the randomly selected raw beef restaurants were randomly selected and any raw beef consumer from the selected table of each restaurant was invited for an interview. All the restaurants selected sold raw and processed beef (roasted, cooked and fried). Only raw beef eaters in raw beef restaurants at the time of the interview who volunteered to be interviewed were used and processed meat eaters were excluded. Consumers of raw beef who did not volunteer for an interview in the selected table were excluded from sampling. Lunch time was deliberately chosen for the interview and a raw beef consumer was interviewed for 30 minutes to 1 hour depending on how quickly the raw beef consumer understood the questions. The interview continued until data or information saturation was reached. All questions in the questionnaire were closed. The questionnaire has five sections and different sets of questions. The first section asked about the general demographic characteristics of raw beef consumers and the second section of the questionnaire asked about the general raw beef eating habits of raw beef consumers, while the third and fourth sections asked about the choice of raw beef at consume and their intention to change or minimize consumption of raw beef, respectively. The fifth section of the questionnaire focused on raw beef consumers’ perception of raw beef consumption. The questions in sections three, four and five allowed the researcher to understand consumers’ choice, intention and perception of raw beef, respectively. The questionnaire consisted of 34 questions/variables. Seven questions were used for each section of demographic characteristics and general eating habits, eight questions on the perception of eating raw beef, and six questions were used for each raw beef consumer choice and intention.

All relevant questions on consumers’ choice, intention and perception of raw beef were grouped into a single variable, which had two categories. These two categories were favorable or unfavorable to the choice, and favorable or unfavorable to both the intention and the perception of consumers of raw beef.

Consumer choice in raw beef consumption was assessed based on the food choice conceptual model [13]. Six questions related to consumer preference for food preparation, type of food usually eaten, reason for usual consumption of a specific food, feelings if consumers did not eat the usual food, the daily frequency of consumption of the usual food and the consumers at mealtimes eat their usual food.

The intention of consumers of raw beef was assessed based on the theory of planned behavior [14]. Six questions (intention to reduce consumption of raw beef, knowledge about the health risks of eating raw beef, intention to improve their knowledge about the health risks of eating raw beef, willingness to stop eating raw beef if consumers know the health risk of eating raw beef, ease of stopping eating raw beef, and barriers to stopping eating raw beef) were used to study consumers’ intention to raw beef to stop eating raw beef.

Raw beef consumers’ perception of the safety of eating raw beef was assessed based on the Likert scale [15]. Raw beef consumers’ agreement on exposure to disease from raw beef, disease mortality from raw beef, benefits of raw beef consumption, effect of spices and alcohol on pathogens transmitted by raw beef, the effect of heating/cooling on pathogens transmitted by raw beef, the contamination of raw beef with dangerous pathogens, the potential of raw beef to transmit disease to humans, and the beliefs of respondents in the safety of raw beef consumption were the items used to assess raw beef consumers’ perception.

The dataset prepared from the 34 questions and the dependent variables of choice, intention and perception of consumers of raw beef were analyzed using bivariate logistic regression with SPSS version 25.

Data analysis

Once the target sample size was collected, it was administered in Microsoft Excel 2013. Based on the response to each question related to choice, intention, and perception, dependent binary variables were created to each evaluation of consumers’ choice, intention and perception of raw beef. Participants whose responses were an indicator of choosing to eat raw beef were categorized as “unfavorable choice” and whose responses were an indicator of not choosing to eat raw beef were grouped into favorable choices. Similarly, all participants who intended to stop eating raw beef were grouped into favorable intentions, and those with contrary intentions were categorized as unfavorable intentions. Similarly for choice and intention, participants who perceive the health risks of eating raw beef were grouped into favorable perceptions, and those who perceive the opposite were categorized as unfavorable perceptions.

Based on p-value of the logistic regression, the predictive explanatory variables of the result, favorable choice or unfavorable choice, favorable intention or unfavorable intention, and favorable perception or unfavorable perceptions were identified. The participant choice, intention and perception surveys were conducted in three stages. The first step was to assess the relationship between potential predictor variables with participants’ choice, intention and perception one by one. Second, the relationship for potential confounding effects was adjusted. Finally, the possibility of an interaction effect between the variables was considered.

To get a first look at the structure of the data, cross-tabulations were used in SPSS version 25. From this basic descriptive tool, it is possible to see the proportions of each response category, which were indicative of the level of participants’ choice, intention and perception of raw beef consumption.

After descriptive investigations using cross tables, the association between the dependent binary variables (choice, intention and perception) and each predictive variable was carried out. Probability values ​​were used to see the association between these dependent binary variables and the predictor variables (variables produced from each question). The effect levels of the predictor variables on participants’ choice, intention and perception were indicated by the odds ratio (OR 95% CI).

Share.

Comments are closed.