Intern
ati
o
n
a
l
Jo
urn
a
l
o
f
P
u
b
lic Hea
l
th Science (IJ
P
HS)
Vol
.
5,
N
o
.
1
,
M
a
rch
2
0
1
6
,
pp
.
55
~
59
I
S
SN
: 225
2-8
8
0
6
55
Jo
urn
a
l
h
o
me
pa
ge
: h
ttp
://iaesjo
u
r
na
l.com/
o
n
lin
e/ind
e
x.ph
p
/
IJPHS
Food S
a
f
e
t
y
Kn
owledge and Pract
i
ce am
ong Comm
unity in
Sg. Pelek, Sepang, Se
la
ngo
r
Da
r
u
l E
h
s
a
n
Nur
Ain
Mah
a
t, Chong K
o
k Shi,
S
a
b
a
riah Abd
Hamid
Facult
y
of Med
i
cine
, C
y
b
e
rja
y
a
Universit
y
Co
lle
ge of M
e
dic
a
l
Sc
ienc
es, Ma
la
ysia
Article Info
A
B
STRAC
T
Article histo
r
y:
Received
Ja
n 27, 2016
Rev
i
sed
Feb
22
, 20
16
Accepted
Feb 28, 2016
Food saf
e
ty
is
a b
a
sic requir
e
ment of
food
q
u
ality
.
I
t
is an
incr
easin
g
l
y
important p
ublic health issue
to
prev
ent and con
t
rol food
bo
rne illn
esses. A
c
r
oss-sec
t
iona
l
study
wa
s de
signe
d to
determine level of kn
o
w
ledg
e and
practice on
foo
d
saf
e
ty
,
to d
e
term
in
e th
e
asso
ciation b
e
tw
een
knowledg
e
and
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
,
and als
o
to
i
d
ent
i
f
y
th
e as
s
o
ci
at
ion be
tween
s
o
c
i
o-
demographic f
actors
and p
r
actice scor
e of
th
e po
p
u
latio
n stud
ied.
This s
t
ud
y
was con
ducted
among adult
po
pulation in Taman B
a
hagia, Sungai Pelek
,
Sepang
, S
e
lang
or Dar
u
l
Ehsan. Data
we
re colle
ct
e
d
usi
n
g an
int
e
rvie
we
d
structur
ed q
u
estionn
air
e
. A stratif
ie
d
r
a
ndom s
a
mplin
g was
performed
to
obta
i
n ho
uses,
f
o
llow
e
d b
y
s
i
m
p
le
rand
om
sam
p
ling
to s
e
l
e
c
t
s
a
m
p
le
in
the
house. A total o
f
115 data sets
were an
aly
s
ed u
s
ing Statistical Pack
age fo
r
Soc
i
a
l
S
c
ie
nce
s
(SPSS) ve
rsion 20.0.
Ana
l
y
s
is showe
d
tha
t
35% of
respond
en
ts hav
e
poor lev
e
l of
knowledge o
n
f
ood saf
e
ty
, whereas 27
% of
the
r
e
spond
ents hav
e
poo
r lev
e
l of
pr
actices on
f
ood safety
. Multiple
lin
ear
regr
es
s
i
on r
e
ve
al
ed th
at th
er
e
are a s
i
gn
if
i
can
t as
s
o
c
i
a
t
i
o
n betwe
e
n
edu
c
ation
lev
e
l (p<0.001)
, Adj b=2.57 (9
5% CI: 1.1
5
, 3
.
99)
and gend
er
(p=0
.048
), Adj
b=1
.
15
(95%
C
I
: 0
.
01
, 2.29) w
ith
pr
actice sco
r
e o
n
fo
od
s
a
fe
t
y
.
Th
er
efor
e,
he
al
th p
r
om
otion
and
ed
ucation on
th
e im
porta
nc
e o
f
practicing fo
od
safety
at h
o
m
e should b
e
focus
e
d to
pr
event fur
t
her
unwant
e
d
h
e
a
lth
ef
fe
cts
.
Keyword:
Food Safety
K
now
ledg
e
Practice
Sepa
ng
Copyright ©
201
6 Institut
e
o
f
Ad
vanced
Engin
eer
ing and S
c
i
e
nce.
All rights re
se
rve
d
.
Co
rresp
ond
i
ng
Autho
r
:
Nu
r Ain
M
a
hat
,
Faculty of Me
dicine,
Cyb
e
rj
aya
Un
iv
ersity Co
lleg
e
of
Medical Sci
e
nces, Malaysia.
Em
a
il: ain
@
cyb
e
rm
ed
.edu
.m
y
1.
INTRODUCTION
Foo
d
safety is
a b
a
sic requ
iremen
t o
f
food
qu
ality.
It is an
i
n
creasi
n
g
l
y i
m
p
o
rtan
t pub
lic
h
ealth
issue
to pre
v
e
n
t or cont
rol food
borne illnesse
s. Food sa
fety is define
d as the a
b
se
nce or acce
ptable and sa
fe
levels
of co
nt
am
i
n
ant
s
, adul
t
e
ra
nt
s,
nat
u
ral
t
o
xi
ns
or any
ot
he
r
com
pone
nt
s t
h
at
are det
r
i
m
ent
a
l
t
o
heal
t
h
on a
n
acut
e
o
r
c
h
r
o
n
i
c exp
o
s
u
re
[
1
]
.
The
pr
obl
e
m
i
s
l
i
k
el
y
t
o
be e
v
en m
o
re
wi
des
p
rea
d
i
n
devel
opi
ng
co
unt
ri
es
whe
r
e
food c
o
ntamination
oc
curs
as a
res
u
lt
o
f
po
or
o
r
i
n
a
d
eq
uat
e
sa
fet
y
pract
i
ces.
Foo
d
b
o
rn
e
ill
n
e
sses, wh
ich
are
p
r
ev
en
tab
l
e,
still
i
m
p
o
s
e a su
b
s
tan
tial b
u
r
d
e
n
on
h
ealth
care system
s.
In M
a
l
a
y
s
i
a
, t
h
e i
n
ci
dence
rat
e
of f
o
od
p
o
i
s
o
n
i
n
g i
n
2
0
13
w
a
s 47
.7
9
per
1
0
0
,
0
0
0
p
o
pul
at
i
ons
[2]
.
F
o
od
bo
r
n
e
illn
esses m
a
y
furth
e
r
red
u
c
e eco
no
m
i
c p
r
odu
ctiv
ity if n
o
t
b
e
ing
prev
en
ted
[3
]. A foo
dbo
rn
e
ou
tbreak
in
d
i
cates th
at
so
m
e
th
in
g
in the fo
od
safety syste
m
n
eed
s to b
e
im
p
r
ov
ed
.
M
a
ny
st
udi
es
on
fo
o
d
safet
y
are pe
rf
orm
e
d on
fo
o
d
ha
n
d
l
e
rs i
n
p
r
em
i
s
es
rarel
y
d
one
o
n
com
m
uni
t
y
po
p
u
l
a
t
i
on. T
h
eref
ore
,
t
h
i
s
st
udy
was
desi
g
n
t
o
det
e
rm
i
n
e l
e
vel
of kn
o
w
l
e
dge an
d p
r
ac
t
i
ce on fo
od sa
fet
y
, t
o
id
en
tify th
e asso
ciatio
n b
e
t
w
een
k
now
ledge
and
practice,
and also t
o
de
t
e
rm
i
n
e soci
o
-
dem
ogra
phi
c
f
act
ors
associated
with practice score.
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
I
S
SN
:
2
252
-88
06
I
J
PH
S Vo
l. 5
,
N
o
. 1
,
Mar
c
h
20
16
:
55
–
59
56
2.
R
E
SEARC
H M
ETHOD
2.
1.
Stud
y design and
sampling proced
ure
A cross-sectional study wa
s conduct
ed
in
a resid
e
n
tial area o
f
Tam
a
n
Bah
a
g
i
a,
wh
ich
is lo
cated
in
Sg.
P
el
ek,
Sepa
ng
, Sel
a
n
g
o
r
.
St
rat
i
f
i
e
d ra
n
d
o
m
sam
p
l
i
ng was
used t
o
o
b
t
ai
n ho
uses
an
d t
h
e
fol
l
o
wi
n
g
si
m
p
l
e
random
sa
m
p
ling use
d
to se
lect responde
nt in the
house
.
The res
p
ondent who di
d not give conse
n
t or
u
n
willin
g
to
particip
ate; ag
e b
e
lo
w 18
years, a p
e
rs
on
in
cap
ab
le o
f
an
swering
th
e
q
u
e
stio
nn
aires, n
o
n
-
M
a
l
a
y
s
i
a
ns and resi
de
nt
s w
h
o st
ay
ed l
e
ss t
h
an
3 m
ont
hs were e
x
cl
u
d
ed
from
t
h
e st
ud
y
.
Sam
p
l
e
si
ze need
e
d
in
th
is st
u
d
y
was 115
after
b
e
in
g calcu
lated
with
referen
c
e
to
prior st
u
d
y
do
n
e
[4
].
2.
2.
Instrument
The
data was c
o
llected via i
n
tervie
wed struc
t
ure
d
qu
estionn
air
e
. Th
e qu
estio
nn
air
e
co
nsists o
f
t
h
r
e
e
m
a
i
n
sect
i
ons
w
h
i
c
h i
n
cl
u
d
e s
o
ci
o
-
dem
o
g
r
a
phi
c
dat
a
, kn
ow
ledg
e,
an
d pr
actice o
f
fo
od
saf
e
ty. Bo
t
h
kn
o
w
l
e
d
g
e an
d pract
i
ce co
m
ponent
s com
p
ri
se o
f
per
s
o
n
al
hy
gi
ene
,
f
o
o
d
ha
n
d
l
i
ng
and f
o
od st
o
r
a
g
e. Tot
a
l
com
pone
nt
o
f
kn
o
w
l
e
d
g
e wa
s 12 a
n
d o
n
e
m
a
rk was
gi
ve
n f
o
r t
h
e co
rre
ct
answe
r
. M
a
xi
m
u
m
score was
1
2
an
d m
i
n
i
m
u
m
was
0
.
Lev
e
l
of kno
wled
ge was classified
i
n
to
low lev
e
l
(l
ess th
an
6
0
%
), m
o
d
e
rate lev
e
l (60
-
7
9
.9%) an
d h
i
g
h
lev
e
l (8
0-10
0%). Meanwh
ile, to
tal co
mp
on
en
t of
pr
actice w
a
s 13
. M
a
x
i
m
u
m
sco
r
e w
a
s
2
6
and m
i
nim
u
m
score
was 1
3
. Level
of
pract
i
ce was cl
assi
fi
ed
in
to
low lev
e
l (less th
an
6
0
%), m
o
d
e
rat
e
lev
e
l
(6
0-
7
9
.
9
%)
an
d
hi
g
h
l
e
vel
(
8
0-
1
00%
).
2.
3.
Da
ta
pr
ocessi
ng an
d an
al
ys
i
s
Data
was en
tered
u
s
ing Statistical Prod
u
c
t
an
d
Se
rv
ice So
lu
tio
ns (SPSS)
v
e
rsi
o
n
2
2
.0. Descri
p
tiv
e
statistics were prese
n
ted t
o
sum
m
a
rize responde
nts’ s
o
cio-dem
ogra
phic c
h
aracteristics,
and t
h
e preval
ence of
k
now
ledg
e and p
r
actice on
foo
d
saf
e
ty. Ch
i-sq
uar
e
w
a
s u
s
ed
to
deter
m
in
e
th
e asso
ciation b
e
tw
een
kno
wled
ge
an
d practice.
Mean
wh
ile, mu
ltip
le lin
ear
regression
was i
m
p
l
e
m
en
ted
to
id
en
tify th
e asso
ciated
so
cio-
dem
ogra
phi
c
f
act
ors
wi
t
h
t
h
e p
r
act
i
ce sco
r
e o
n
fo
o
d
sa
fe
t
y
. A
p
val
u
e
l
e
ss t
h
a
n
0.
05
we
re c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
ed as
statistical
ly sig
n
i
fican
t.
3.
R
E
SU
LTS AN
D ANA
LY
SIS
3.
1.
Charac
teristic
s of s
a
mple
In
o
v
eral
l
,
11
5
resp
o
nde
nt
s
w
e
re com
p
l
e
t
e
d
t
h
e q
u
est
i
o
nnai
r
es,
whi
c
h m
a
ke u
p
1
00%
re
spo
n
se
rat
e
.
Table 1 indicat
es characte
r
istics of
res
p
onde
n
ts in Sg Pe
lek, Sep
a
ng
. Majority o
f
th
e respo
n
d
e
n
t
s were fe
m
a
le
(5
5.
7%
), I
n
di
an (
6
9.
5%)
,
m
a
rri
ed
(
6
3
.
5
%
)
and
ha
ve l
o
w ed
ucat
i
o
n l
e
vel
(
no
f
o
rm
al
scho
ol
,
pri
m
ary
,
seco
nda
ry
) (7
7
.
4%
).
Tabl
e
1. C
h
ara
c
t
e
ri
st
i
c
s of t
h
e
sam
p
l
e
:
Soci
o
-
dem
ogra
p
hi
c,
Soci
o
-
ec
on
om
ic (
N
=
1
1
5
)
Variables
Mean (SD)
Frequen
c
y (n
)
Percen
tage (
%
)
Socio-
dem
ographic
Age
42.
61 (
15.
02)
-
-
Gende
r
Male
Fema
le
Race
Ma
la
y
Ch
in
ese
I
ndian
51
64
4
31
80
44.
3
55.
7
3.
5
27.
0
69.
5
Marit
a
l st
at
us
Married
Non married
73
42
63.
5
36.
5
Education level
Lower
(
none,
primary,
secondary)
Higher (
t
ertiary)
89
26
77.
4
22.
6
Socio-econo
m
i
c
Inco
m
e
1000.
0(
2
000.
0)
*
-
-
*
M
ed
ian
(In
terq
u
a
rtile Rang
e)
3.
2.
Know
l
e
d
g
e
an
d Pr
acti
ce
of
f
o
o
d
s
a
fe
ty
Tabl
e 2
rep
r
es
ent
s
l
e
vel
o
f
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
on
f
o
o
d
sa
fet
y
. M
o
st
o
f
t
h
e
resp
on
de
nt
s ha
vi
n
g
m
oderat
e
lev
e
l of
foo
d
saf
e
ty kn
ow
ledg
e; 50
% (n
=57)
,
f
o
llow
e
d
b
y
p
oor
k
n
o
w
ledge; 3
5
% (n
=4
0)
(
r
e
f
e
r
t
o
Tab
l
e
2
)
.
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
I
J
PH
S I
S
SN
:
225
2-8
8
0
6
Fo
od
S
a
f
e
t
y
K
now
l
e
dge
a
n
d
Pract
i
ce a
m
on
g C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
i
n
Sg
. Pel
ek,
Se
pa
n
g
,
Sel
a
n
g
o
r
..
.. (
N
ur
Ai
n
Ma
hat
)
57
Tabl
e 2. K
n
o
w
l
e
dge o
f
f
o
od
s
a
fet
y
OVERA
LL KNO
WL
EDG
E
Variables
Fr
equency
(
n
)
Percent (%)
Good
18
15.
7
M
oder
a
te
57
49.
5
Poor
40
34.
8
Tab
l
e
3
d
e
no
t
e
s lev
e
l
o
f
practice o
n
fo
od saf
e
ty. Based on
tab
l
e 3, a to
tal of
6
0
% (n
=69)
o
f
resp
o
nde
nt
s
w
e
re ha
vi
n
g
m
oderat
e
l
e
v
e
l
o
f
fo
o
d
safe
ty practice,
fo
llo
wed
b
y
po
or lev
e
l of
p
r
actice; 2
7
%
(n=
3
1).
Table
3.
Practi
ce of food safe
ty
OVERA
LL PRAC
TICE
Variables
Fr
equency
(
n
)
Percent (%)
Good
15
13.
0
M
oder
a
te
69
60.
0
Poor
31
27.
0
3.
3.
Ass
o
ciati
o
n be
tween knowle
dge
an
d pr
ac
t
i
ce of
f
o
o
d
s
a
f
e
ty
There i
s
n
o
rel
a
t
i
ons
hi
p
bet
w
een k
n
o
wl
e
dge
and
p
r
act
i
ce o
f
f
o
o
d
sa
fet
y
. The
p val
u
e w
a
s 0.
2
50
(a
s
in Ta
ble 4).
Tab
l
e
4
.
A
s
so
ciatio
n
b
e
t
w
een
k
now
ledg
e an
d pr
actice of
food
saf
e
ty
Knowledge
Practice
P value
Good
M
oder
a
te &
Poor
N (%)
N (%)
Good
4 (
26.
7)
14 (
14.
0)
0.
250
M
oder
a
te &
Poor
11 (
73.
3)
86 (
86.
0)
3.
4.
Ass
o
ciati
o
n be
tween s
o
cio-demographi
c f
a
ctors
a
nd
f
ood
sa
fet
y
p
r
ac
ti
ce
Table
5 s
h
owed the
ass
o
ciation
betwee
n
socio-de
m
o
gra
phic
factors a
n
d practice sc
ore
of food
safety. Mu
ltip
l
e
lin
ear reg
r
essio
n
re
v
ealed th
ere was
a
si
g
n
i
fican
t relatio
n
s
h
i
p
b
e
tween
g
e
nd
er
an
d food
safety
p
r
actice (p=
0
.
0
48
) (re
f
e
r
to
Ta
ble 5).
Fem
a
le
has
si
gn
ifican
tly h
i
gher
sco
r
e o
f
pra
c
tice as com
p
ared to
m
a
l
e
by
1.15 (
9
5
%
C
I
:
0.
01
, 2.
29
) (i
n t
a
bl
e
5)
. Fu
rt
he
rm
ore, educat
i
on l
e
vel
was si
g
n
i
f
i
cant
l
y
associ
at
ed wi
t
h
food
safety p
r
actice. Hig
h
e
r ed
u
cation
lev
e
l
wh
ich
in
cl
u
d
es
t
e
rt
i
a
ry
educat
i
on h
a
s si
g
n
i
f
i
cant
l
y
hi
ghe
r s
c
ore
of
p
r
act
i
ce as c
o
m
p
ared t
o
l
o
wer e
d
ucat
i
o
n
l
e
vel
(
no
ed
uc
at
i
on,
p
r
i
m
ary
,
seco
nda
ry
e
d
u
cat
i
on)
by
2.
5
7
(9
5%
C
I
:
1.
15
,
3.
99
)
(i
n Ta
bl
e 5
)
.
W
i
t
h
t
h
e a
b
ov
e t
w
o si
gni
fi
cant
va
ri
abl
e
s, t
h
e
m
odel
ex
pl
ai
ned
1
7
%
of
va
ri
at
i
o
n
of the
practice
score
in t
h
e st
udy sam
p
le (R
2
=0
.1
70)
.
Tabl
e 5. Soci
o-
dem
ogra
phi
c f
act
ors
a
ssoci
at
ed wi
t
h
fo
o
d
sa
fet
y
pract
i
c
e
Variables SLR
a
MLR
b
b
c
(
95%
CI)
P
value
Adj
.
b
d
(9
5
%
CI)
t-sta
t
P
v
a
l
ue
Age (y
ear
s
)
-
0
.
00
(
-
0
.
04,
0.
03)
0.
938
0.
01
(
-
0
.
03,
0.
06)
0.
62
0.
535
Gender
1.
56
(
0
.
45,
2.
66)
0.
006*
1.
15
(
0
.
01,
2.
29)
2.
00
0.
048*
Race
-0.03
(-1.27,
1.20)
0.955
-0.22 (-1.45,
1.
01)
-0.35
0.723
M
a
r
ital status
0.
23
(
-
0
.
94,
1.
41)
0.
695
0.
43
(
-
0
.
78,
1.
65)
0.
70
0.
485
E
ducation level
2.
24
(
0
.
95,
3.
54)
0.
001*
2.
57
(
1
.
15,
3.
99)
3.
59
<0.
001*
I
n
co
m
e
0.
00
(
0
.
00,
0.
00)
0.
302
0.
00
(
-
0
.
00,
0.
00)
-
1
.
24
0.
217
a
Sim
p
le line
a
r r
e
gression
b
Multiple l
i
near
regression (R2=
0.170;
The m
odel reasona
bl
y
fits well:
Model assum
p
tions
are
m
e
t: There
is
no int
e
rac
tion
be
tween
indep
e
nde
nts vari
ables
and
no m
u
lti-
coll
ine
a
rit
y
problem
)
c
Crude regr
ession coeff
i
cient
d
Adjus
t
ed regr
es
s
i
on coeff
i
ci
ent
*Significan
t at
p
<
0.05
4.
DIS
C
USSI
ON
Based
on
th
is
stu
d
y
, th
er
e
was h
i
g
h
pr
ev
alen
ce
o
f
r
e
spond
en
ts h
a
v
i
ng po
or
and
m
o
d
e
rate lev
e
l of
k
now
ledg
e
on
f
ood
saf
e
ty, wh
ich w
e
r
e
35
% and
50
%
r
e
spectiv
ely. Th
is
w
a
s m
a
r
k
ed
ly lo
w
e
r
as co
m
p
ar
ed t
o
pre
v
i
o
us st
u
d
y
co
nd
uct
e
d
i
n
Fede
ral
Ter
r
i
t
o
ry
of
P
u
t
r
aj
a
y
a by
A
b
Ha
m
i
d et
al
., i
n
whi
c
h t
h
e
res
p
on
de
nt
s
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
I
S
SN
:
2
252
-88
06
I
J
PH
S Vo
l. 5
,
N
o
. 1
,
Mar
c
h
20
16
:
55
–
59
58
were
fo
u
nd t
o
have
g
o
o
d
kn
o
w
l
e
d
g
e o
f
f
o
o
d
safet
y
wi
t
h
m
ean score
of
90
.3
%, wi
t
h
b
e
nchm
ark set
at
85%
[5].
It
was als
o
com
p
aratively lowe
r
t
h
an
t
h
e
m
ean score
f
o
r f
o
od
ha
n
d
l
e
r’
s k
n
o
w
l
e
dge
i
n
ot
he
r st
udy
[
4
]
.
In c
ont
rast
, o
n
l
y
13% o
f
re
s
p
o
n
d
ent
s
i
n
t
h
i
s
st
udy
ha
vi
n
g
g
o
od
pract
i
c
e of
fo
o
d
safet
y
. Thi
s
was
l
o
we
r t
h
a
n
p
r
i
o
r st
udy
d
one
by
A
b
Ham
i
d
et
al
., w
h
er
e 92
.9
% o
f
r
e
sp
on
d
e
n
t
s
co
ndu
cted
goo
d
pr
actices on
fo
o
d
safet
y
[
5
]
.
Whe
n
f
o
od h
a
ndl
e
r
s di
d not
pract
i
ce go
o
d
pers
o
nnel
hy
gi
ene or pr
o
p
er han
d
l
i
n
g,
t
h
ey
can be
t
h
e vect
or
f
o
r
g
r
o
w
t
h
o
f
m
i
croor
ga
ni
sm
s t
h
ro
ug
h
ha
nd
s, c
u
t
s
, m
out
hs,
s
k
i
n
s an
d
hai
r
s
[
6
]
.
Knowledg
e
o
n
food
safety was no
t statistic
ally si
g
n
i
fican
t
with
food
safety p
r
actice (p
=0
.2
50). Th
is
was
c
o
nt
radi
ct
ed wi
t
h
ot
he
r st
udi
es,
w
h
e
r
e
l
e
vel
of f
o
o
d
safety kn
owled
g
e
was statistically asso
ciated
with
food
safety practice [7
],[8
]. Th
is in
dicates that the res
p
ondents
use
d
to
do t
h
e right practices although their
knowledge is
deficient a
n
d
vice versa
.
T
h
e
expla
n
ation
is
mayb
e d
u
e
to
cu
ltu
re wh
ere
they practice hygiene
an
d h
a
nd
washin
g
b
e
fore eati
n
g and prep
ari
n
g foo
d
s
.
A
p
r
ev
iou
s
qu
alitat
i
v
e
stud
y co
ndu
cted
i
n
Klang Valley
st
at
ed t
h
e resp
on
de
nt
s had
b
a
si
c kno
wl
ed
g
e
on pe
rso
n
al
hy
gi
ene p
r
act
i
ce,
m
a
i
n
l
y
on
han
d
was
h
i
n
g an
d
d
e
sp
ite th
eir
po
or
kn
ow
ledg
e th
ey h
a
v
e
a goo
d pr
actice in
p
e
r
s
on
al h
y
g
i
en
e
[
9
].
In
th
is stud
y,
th
e resu
lts d
e
m
o
n
s
trated
th
ere
was a significant ass
o
ciation betwe
e
n gender a
nd
practice sc
ore
on food
safety. Fem
a
le practiced sa
fety
d
u
ri
ng
f
o
o
d
ha
ndl
i
n
g
m
o
re as c
o
m
p
ared t
o
m
a
le. T
h
i
s
is because fe
m
a
le was alw
a
ys involve
d a
nd re
sponsibl
e
for food m
a
tters when com
p
are
d
to m
a
le. This is
sup
p
o
rt
e
d
by
pre
v
i
o
us st
u
d
y
,
su
g
g
est
e
d
w
o
m
e
n was m
o
re a
w
are
o
f
hi
ghe
r l
e
vel
s
o
f
t
h
reat
a
n
d c
o
ncer
n
because they
usually have
m
o
re responsi
b
ility for c
o
mp
lex
decision-making i
n
ev
e
r
yday food
preparati
on
and
co
ns
um
pt
ion
[
1
0]
. T
h
ere
was
al
so
a si
g
n
i
fican
t asso
ciatio
n
b
e
tween edu
cation
a
l lev
e
l and fo
od
safety
practice sc
ore
.
Higher education level
ho
ld
er was practiced
b
e
tter th
an those with lower ed
u
cation lev
e
l. Th
is
i
s
com
p
l
i
a
nt
w
i
t
h
p
r
evi
ous
st
udy
c
o
nd
uct
e
d
by
Ab
.
Ham
i
d
[
5
]
,
am
ong
ha
wke
r
s i
n
P
u
t
r
a
j
ay
a wi
t
h
si
g
n
i
f
i
cant
di
ffe
re
nce bet
w
een m
ean score
on
pract
i
c
e
s
and e
d
ucat
i
o
n l
e
vel
f
o
r M
a
l
a
y
s
i
a
ns (p=
0
.
0
0
3
)
.T
he res
u
l
t
sho
w
s
th
at lo
wer educatio
n
a
l lev
e
l
h
a
v
e
an effect
in
fo
od
sa
fet
y
pract
i
ce.
T
h
e
r
e
f
o
r
e, pe
opl
e w
i
t
h
hi
g
h
e
r
e
d
u
cat
i
on
will p
r
actice
better on
foo
d
safety.
Thi
s
st
udy
ha
d
seve
ral
l
i
m
i
t
a
t
i
ons.
Fi
rst
l
y
, t
h
ere
i
s
p
o
pul
at
i
on
bi
as,
w
h
er
e t
h
e
resi
de
nt
s
of
Tam
a
n
Bahagia are mostly India
n
and Chinese
.
Thus, the ris
k
fac
t
or for race is not reliable. Furt
herm
ore, there are
intervie
wer
bi
ases. T
h
e survey was conducted by se
ve
ral in
terv
iewers
at th
e sam
e
t
i
m
e. Th
e op
in
i
o
n
or
p
r
eju
d
i
ce
on
the p
a
rt of th
e interv
iewer m
a
y
o
ccur
wh
er
e t
h
ey
m
a
y ask
th
e qu
estion
in
a
way th
at
will affect
t
h
e res
p
on
de
nt
un
de
rst
a
n
d
i
n
g
and
res
u
l
t
o
u
t
c
om
e.
R
e
si
dent
s i
n
T
a
m
a
n B
a
hagi
a
Sg.
Pel
e
k
,
Sel
a
ng
o
r
nee
d
t
o
i
m
prove t
h
ei
r e
ducat
i
o
n l
e
vel
and
i
m
prove
th
eir un
d
e
rstand
ing
s
on
fo
od
safety. Health
clin
ics are en
co
urag
ed
to
d
o
fo
llow up
and
g
i
v
i
ng
expo
su
re to
h
ealth
edu
catio
n
fro
m
ti
me
to
ti
m
e
so
th
at th
ey will
al
ways b
e
rem
i
n
d
e
d
.
Moreo
v
er, m
a
le
is ad
v
i
sed
t
o
in
vo
lv
e th
em
selv
es m
o
re o
f
ten
in
fo
od
h
a
n
d
ling
to
pro
p
erly en
g
a
g
e
with
foo
d
safety, as p
r
actice mak
e
perfects.
5.
CO
NCL
USI
O
N
Th
e
r
e
su
lt of
t
h
is stud
y sho
w
ed
a m
o
d
e
r
a
te
an
d poo
r lev
e
l
o
f
kno
w
l
ed
g
e
an
d pr
actice
o
f
fo
od
saf
e
ty.
Socio-dem
ogra
phic fact
ors as
sociated
with
food
safety p
r
actices in
clu
d
e
g
e
nd
er and
ed
u
cation
lev
e
l. It i
s
recom
m
ended
t
o
have a hi
gh
er ed
ucat
i
on l
e
vel
and i
n
c
u
l
c
a
t
e a good food
safety practice in order to e
r
a
d
icate
fo
o
d
poi
s
oni
ng
an
d
pr
om
ot
e h
eal
t
h
i
e
r l
i
v
i
n
g.
ACKNOWLE
DGE
M
ENTS
We acknowle
d
ge and are grat
eful for the
financial
h
e
lp
fu
rn
ish
e
d
b
y
Cyberj
aya Un
iv
ersity Co
lleg
e
of M
e
di
cal
Sc
i
e
nces (C
UC
M
S
).
W
e
a
r
e
al
so ack
no
wl
e
dgi
ng t
h
e resi
dent
s
of Tam
a
n B
a
ha
gi
a, S
g
. Pel
e
k,
Sepa
ng
as t
h
e
resp
o
nde
nt
s
of
t
h
i
s
st
u
d
y
as
wel
l
as t
h
e
st
udents
of CUC
M
S as the
da
t
a
col
l
ect
ors
.
Al
so, ot
he
r
me
m
b
ers of th
i
s
research group
n
a
m
e
l
y
Nad
i
a Sh
ah
ir
a
Azmi, Siti Nur
Amalin
a Farh
an
Ab
d Aziz, Nu
rat
h
irah
Sen
i
n, an
d Burh
anud
d
i
n
H
i
l
m
i Mo
hd
Sh
ar
ani.
REFERE
NC
ES
[1]
Mustaffa, AM., “Contaminatio
n, Adulte
rations, and
Chemicall Residues
in
M
a
lay
s
ian Food:
Past, Present an
d
F
u
ture”,
Mala
ysian Journal o
f
Pu
blic
Health
Med
i
cine
,
vo
l. 11, 20
11.
[2]
Health
Facts
,
Ministr
y
of Health
Malay
s
ia, 2014
.
[3]
World Health
Organization
,
“WHO Initiative to
Estim
at
e
th
e Gl
obal Burd
en of
Foodborne Diseases. A Sum
m
a
r
y
Document”, 2008. Retrieved August 26, 2014 from
http://www.who.int/foodsaf
ety
/
fo
odborne_disease/Summary
_Doc.pdf.
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
I
J
PH
S I
S
SN
:
225
2-8
8
0
6
Fo
od
S
a
f
e
t
y
K
now
l
e
dge
a
n
d
Pract
i
ce a
m
on
g C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
i
n
Sg
. Pel
ek,
Se
pa
n
g
,
Sel
a
n
g
o
r
..
.. (
N
ur
Ai
n
Ma
hat
)
59
[4]
Azira, N
., Faid
,
M., Mustafa
,
S., S
y
afina
z
, R
.
, Malin
a, “
K
nowledge, At
titud
e
and Prac
tic
es Regarding Foo
d
H
y
gien
e
and Sanitation of
Food”,
Food Con
t
rol
, vol. 27
, pp
. 289
-293, 2012
.
[5]
Ab. Ham
i
d, R.,
Radu, S., Othm
an, M.,
Toh, PS., Cha
i
,
LC
., “
A
ssessm
e
nt of Knowledge, At
titu
de and Pract
ic
es
Concerning Fo
od Safety
amo
ng Restauran
t
W
o
rkers in Putraj
a
y
a,
Mala
ys
ia”
,
Food S
c
ience and Quality
Management
, vo
l. 32
, 2014
.
[6]
Br
y
a
n
,
F., “Risk of Practices
, Procedures
and Proce
ssess That
Lead to
Outbreak
s of Foodborne Diseases”,
Journa
l
of Food
Protection
, pp
. 663-673
, 1988.
[7]
Gizaw, Z.,
Gebr
ehiwot,
M
., Tek
a
, Z.,
“Food Safety
Practice
and
Associated
Factors of Food Handlers Working in
Substandard Food Establishment in
Gondar Town, Northwest Ethiopia”,
International J
Foo
d
Sci Nutr Diet
,
vol/issue:
4(5), p
p
.138-146, 2014
.
[8]
Labib
,
S., Mohammad, MO.,
Mohammad Raed, AD., “Food H
y
giene Knowledg
e, Attitud
e
s and
Practices of
the
Food Handlers in the Militar
y
H
o
spitals”,
Food
and Nutrition
Sciences,
pp
. 245-
251, 2013
.
[9]
Tan, SL., Chen
g, PL., Soon, HK., Ghazal
i,
H., Mah
y
ud
in,
NA., “
A
Qualit
ativ
e Stud
y
on Personal H
y
gie
n
e
Knowledge and
Practices
among Food Ha
ndler
s at Selected
Primar
y
Schools
in Klang Valley Area, Selango
r
,
Mala
y
s
ia
”,
Inter
national Food Resrach
Journal,
vol/issue: 20(1), pp.
71-76
,
2013
.
[10]
W
o
rs
le
y
,
A
W
.,
W
e
i C.,H
unte
r
,
W
., “
G
ender dif
f
erenc
e
s
in th
e influence of foo
d
safety
and health con
cerns o
n
dietar
y
and
ph
y
s
ical activity
habits”,
Food po
licy
, vol. 41, pp. 184
-192, 2013
.
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.