Emerging evidence indicates that nutrition science students and graduates are confused about their scope-of-practice [1]. Contributing to this confusion may be an overlap in curricula between dietetic and non-dietetic nutrition programs, as well as the lack of resources on scope-of-practice to guide decisions in settings where clients may seek dietary advice from nutrition graduates (with non-dietetic qualifications). Therefore, the current study aimed to explore nutrition science students’ perceptions towards (i) their overall scope-of-practice and (ii) decision-making-frameworks to guide practice decisions with clients seeking nutrition and dietary advice. A multi-methods approach was used to conduct this research. Firstly, desktop research was used to identify already-published scope-of-practice documents/decision-making-frameworks for use as prompts in focus groups/interviews with eligible participants who were 18-years or older and currently enrolled in a university nutrition (non-dietetic) program in Australia. Recruitment included a combination of convenience, purposive, and snowball sampling. Discussions were conducted from April to June 2024, with all data being recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using an inductive thematic methodology to identify codes and major themes/subthemes. Researcher reflexivity assured trustworthiness. Six scope-of-practice documents were identified across different health disciplines, and mostly included decision-making tools underpinned by discipline-specific competency standards. These were used to prompt discussion about decision-making frameworks. Eleven female nutrition science students from the University of Wollongong, aged 19-29 years, mostly in their final year (91%, n=10), participated in three focus groups and three in-depth interviews, lasting 30-90 minutes. Four main themes emerged: (1) Blurred Lines relating to confusion and inconsistencies in non-dietetic nutrition qualifications; (2) Is nutrition science enough? relating to feelings that the qualification does not prepare graduates for future client-facing settings where dietary advice is delivered; (3) What’s in a name? relating to the ambiguity and challenges tied to an unregulated professional identity; and (4) Defining the Scope: A Call to Action relating to an urgent need for a clear, comprehensive scope-of-practice framework in nutrition science. Overall, the study findings suggest that nutrition science students are confused about their scope-of-practice, especially in practice settings where future clients may seek dietary advice from them. This stems from inadequate guidance resources, leading to feelings of unpreparedness for the workforce. Universities can help to alleviate these feelings by clarifying scope-of-practice and introducing into the curricula a validated decision-making-tool, as well as work-integrated-learning experiences and relevant careers education. Next-phase research is needed to define the scope-of-practice through a consensus process with relevant stakeholders, and to co-design and test a prototype decision-making tool.