BackgroundThe literature on determinants of dietary behavior among youth is extensive and unwieldy. We conducted an umbrella review or review-of-reviews to present a comprehensive overview of the current knowledge.MethodsTherefore, we included systematic reviews identified in four databases (i.e. PubMed, PsycINFO, The Cochrane Library and Web of Science) that summarized determinants of observable child and adolescent dietary behaviors. Data extraction included a judgment of the importance of determinants, strength of evidence and evaluation of the methodological quality of the eligible reviews.ResultsIn total, 17 reviews were considered eligible. Whereas social-cognitive determinants were addressed most intensively towards the end of the 20th century, environmental determinants (particularly social and physical environmental) have been studied most extensively during the past decade, thereby representing a paradigm shift.With regard to environmental determinants, mixed findings were reported. Sedentary behavior and intention were found to be significant determinants of a wide range of dietary behaviors in most reviews with limited suggestive evidence due to the cross-sectional study designs. Other potential determinants such as automaticity, self-regulation and subjective norm have been studied in relatively few studies, but results are promising.ConclusionThe multitude of studies conducted on potential determinants of dietary behavior provides quite convincing evidence of the importance of several determinants (i.e. quite some variables were significantly related to dietary behavior). However, because of the often used weak research designs in the studies covered in the available reviews, the evidence for true determinants is suggestive at best.

Context: Multiple studies have been conducted on correlates of dietary behavior in adults, but a clear overview is currently lacking. Objective: An umbrella review, or review-of-reviews, was conducted to summarize and synthesize the scientific evidence on correlates and determinants of dietary behavior in adults. Data Sources: Eligible systematic reviews were identified in four databases: PubMed, PsycINFO, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Only reviews published between January 1990 and May 2014 were included. Study Selection: Systematic reviews of observable food and dietary behavior that describe potential behavioral determinants of dietary behavior in adults were included. After independent selection of potentially relevant reviews by two authors, a total of 14 reviews were considered eligible. Data Extraction: For data extraction, the importance of determinants, the strength of the evidence, and the methodological quality of the eligible reviews were evaluated. Multiple observers conducted the data extraction independently. Data Synthesis: Social-cognitive determinants and environmental determinants (mainly the social-cultural environment) were included most often in the available reviews. Sedentary behavior and habit strength were consistently identified as important correlates of dietary behavior. Other correlates and potential determinants of dietary behavior, such as motivational regulation, shift work, and the political environment, have been studied in relatively few studies, but results are promising. Conclusions: The multitude of studies conducted on correlates of dietary behavior provides mixed, but sometimes quite convincing, evidence. However, because of the generally weak research design of the studies covered in the available reviews, the evidence for true determinants is suggestive, at best.

This study shows that the subjects of palliative care and end-of-life-decision-making were very much dominated by the issue of euthanasia in the Netherlands. The AED was the best known AD; and factors that can be linked to euthanasia play an important role in whether or not people choose to draw up an AD. This differentiates the Netherlands from other countries and, when it comes to ADs, the global differences between countries and cultures are still so large that the highest possible goals, at this moment in time, are observing and possibly learning from other cultural settings.

BackgroundLimited decision-making capacity (DMC) of older people affects their abilities to communicate about their preferences regarding end-of-life care. In an advance directive (AD) people can write down preferences for (non)treatment or appoint a proxy as a representative in (non)treatment choices in case of limited DMC.The aim is to study limited DMC during the end of life and compare the background, (satisfaction with) care and communication characteristics of people with and without limited DMC. Furthermore, the aim is to describe patient proxies’ opinions about experiences with the use of (appointed proxy) ADs.MethodsUsing a questionnaire, data were collected from proxies of participants of a representative sample of the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (n=168) and a purposive sample of the Advance Directive cohort study (n=184). Differences between groups (with and without limited DMC, and/or with and without AD) were tested with chi-square tests, using a level of significance of p < 0.05.ResultsAt a month before death 27% of people had limited DMC; this increased to 67% of people having limited DMC in the last week of life. The care received was in accordance with the patient’s preferences for the majority of older people, although less often for people who had limited DMC for more than a week. The majority of the proxies were satisfied with the communication between physician and the patient and them, regardless of DMC of the patient. Of people with an AD, a small majority of relatives indicated that the AD had been of additional value. Finally, no differences were found in the role of the relative and the satisfaction with this role between people with and without a proxy AD.ConclusionsAlthough relatives have positive experiences with ADs, our study does not provide strong evidence that (proxy) ADs are very influential in the last phase of life. They can best be seen as a tool for advance care planning.