Research:
A collaborative approach
This
article seeks to illustrate lessons learned and challenges met in a
food safety education project conducted by researchers from the State
Universities of Colorado, Ohio and Washington, US
There
are innumerable benefits of multi-state collaboration on research projects
funded by federal agencies. An increased depth and breadth of research
can be achieved through sharing ideas and expertise, adding a greater
degree of credibility to the research conducted. Avoiding duplication
of research can lead to greater cost effectiveness. On the other hand,
the distance between collaborators as well as social, cultural and institutional
policy differences between states can challenge the success of multi-state
collaborations.
The
project aimed to develop and validate an instrument that could reliably
evaluate the effectiveness of food safety education programmes for low-income
audiences. The team consisted of a principal investigator, a project
coordinator from each university, and two graduate students from Colorado
State University.
The
approach
The data collection of the project was divided into three stages. In
the first stage, nationally-recognised experts in food microbiology,
epidemiology, food safety education and food safety policy were surveyed
using a four-round, Web-based Delphi technique to develop consensus
regarding key food handling behaviours related to foodborne illnesses.
A food safety expert summit conference was then held to review the Delphi
data and finalise a consumer food safety behaviour list.
The
purpose of the second stage was to determine whether self-reported behaviours
could be a valid way to assess behavioural outcomes of food safety education
programmes among low-income consumers. It involved comparing data from
homemakers taking a self-reported behavioural questionnaire with data
collected by observing their food handling behaviours during their food
preparation activities and interviews regarding their in-home food handling
behaviours.
The
third stage of the project was devoted to compiling and testing an item
bank of food safety attitude, knowledge and behaviour questions for
use in evaluation of food safety education programmes.
From
a research method point of view, developing the test instruments was
most time consuming and challenging. The first major task the researchers
had was to develop a food safety behavioural questionnaire. A question
bank was first developed at the food safety expert summit conference.
From the bank, a food safety behaviour questionnaire was later developed,
reviewed with Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Programme (EFNEP)
participants in Colorado on the format, readability and usability of
the questions and then revised by the researchers.
The
second major task was the development of a cooking observation checklist.
Audits International Simplified Home Kitchen Food Safety Checklist was
used as a model. The checklist focused on a few critical food handling
behaviours such as washing hands, washing countertops and utensils,
washing raw products and using a thermometer.
The
third major task was the development of interview questions. As final
preparation prior to recruiting participants, practice observations
were conducted and taped at the three universities, coded by all the
project coordinators and checked for consistency of data collection
and analysis.
With
all the preparation work done, the research team set out to recruit
volunteers for the study. Over 70 individuals, enrolled in classes with
FSNEP or EFNEP in Ohio, Washington and Colorado were recruited to participate
in a 'cooking methods study'. They were told the purpose of the study
was “to better understand usual food preparation practices”, so that
improved approaches to nutrition education classes could be developed.
The study was conducted within three weeks after volunteer participants
attended a food safety class in their Nutrition Education Programme.
The
project
Cooking
observations were conducted in community kitchens. That is, Extension
buildings, schools and churches. All necessary equipment, supplies,
and food items were provided. A video camera was placed on a stationary
tripod in as unobtrusive a location as possible to diminish its presence
during the cooking observations. Participants were encouraged to cook
as closely as possible to how they would in their own kitchens. Immediately
following the cooking session, an in-depth interview was conducted to
ascertain the behaviours that could not be validated through direct
observation. The use of questionnaire, observation and interview yielded
a large quantity of data for analysis.
Pivotal
to the success of the data collection was the county-based Extension
faculty and paraprofessionals, hereby referred to as county-based collaborators.
Their valuable insights into identifying possible cultural and logistic
barriers that could affect participation by the target audience provided
a vital link between the researchers and study participants in each
respective state. Through their recommendations, many protocol changes
were made. For example, the observation site was changed from homes
to community kitchens, due to possible privacy and safety concerns of
in-home audits and the use of recipes was replaced by simple instructions
for performing basic food preparation tasks involving meat/poultry and
fresh produce.
.....CONTD
TO
READ FURTHER... SUBSCRIBE TO YOUR
COPY TODAY!!!
