Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25920399›Full record

ArticleHealth promotion international2016

A snapshot of the scope of obesity prevention practice in Australia.

Tahna Pettman, Kristy Bolton, Penny Love, Elizabeth Waters, Tim Gill, Jill Whelan, Sinead Boylan, Rebecca Armstrong, John Coveney, Sue Booth and 2 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health promotion international, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Tahna PettmanSchool of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Kristy BoltonPopulation Health Strategic Research Centre, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
Penny LovePopulation Health Strategic Research Centre, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia penny.love@deakin.edu.au.
Elizabeth WatersSchool of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Tim GillBoden Institute of Obesity, Nutrition, Exercise and Eating Disorders, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Jill WhelanPopulation Health Strategic Research Centre, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
Sinead BoylanBoden Institute of Obesity, Nutrition, Exercise and Eating Disorders, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Rebecca ArmstrongSchool of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
John CoveneySchool of Health Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Sue BoothSchool of Health Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Boyd SwinburnSchool of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Steven AllenderPopulation Health Strategic Research Centre, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
Deakin University · AUUniversity of Melbourne · AUFlinders University · AUUniversity of Sydney · AUUniversity of Auckland · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Community-based initiatives (CBIs) that build capacity and promote healthy environments hold promise for preventing obesity and non-communicable disease, however their characteristics remain poorly understood and lessons are learned in isolation. This limits understanding of likely effectiveness of CBIs; the potential for actively supporting practice; and the translation of community-based knowledge into policy. Building on an initial survey (2010), an online survey was launched (2013) with the aim to describe the reach and characteristics of Australian CBIs and identify and evaluate elements known to contribute to best practice, effectiveness and sustainability. Responses from 104 CBIs were received in 2013. Geographic location generally reflected population density in Australia. Duration of CBIs was short-term (median 3 years; range 0.2-21.0 years), delivered mostly by health departments and local governments. Median annual funding had more than doubled since the 2010 survey, but average staffing had not increased. CBIs used at least two strategy types, with a preference for individual behaviour change strategies. Targeting children was less common (31%) compared with the 2010 survey (57%). Logic models and theory were used in planning, but there was low use of research evidence and existing prevention frameworks. Nearly, all CBIs had an evaluation component (12% of budget), but dissemination was limited. This survey provides information on the scope and varied quality of the current obesity prevention investment in Australia. To boost the quality and effectiveness of CBIs, further support systems may be required to ensure that organizations adopt upstream, evidence-informed approaches; and integrate CBIs into systems, policies and environments.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAustraliaChildChild, PreschoolCommunity Health ServicesCross-Sectional StudiesHealth PromotionHumansInfantMiddle AgedObesityYoung AdultAustraliacommunity-basedobesityprevention

Identifiers

PMID25920399
PMCPMC5009218
OpenAlexW2112192285

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.