Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29374480›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2018

The challenges of interventions to promote healthier food in independent takeaways in England: qualitative study of intervention deliverers' views.

Louis Goffe, Linda Penn, Jean Adams, Vera Araujo-Soares, Carolyn D Summerbell, Charles Abraham, Martin White, Ashley Adamson, Amelia A Lake

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

9 authors.

Louis GoffeInstitute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. louis.goffe@ncl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-3623-2458
Linda PennInstitute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Jean AdamsCentre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), MRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Vera Araujo-SoaresInstitute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Carolyn D SummerbellFuse - UKCRC Centre for Translational Research in Public Health, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Charles AbrahamPsychology Applied to Health, Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Martin WhiteInstitute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Ashley AdamsonInstitute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Amelia A LakeFuse - UKCRC Centre for Translational Research in Public Health, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

Funding

British Heart FoundationCancer Research UKDepartment of Health NIHR-RP-02-12-001Medical Research Council MR/K023187/1Medical Research Council MR/K02325X/1National Institute for Health Research (GB) School for Public Health Research SPHR-FUS-PH1-FOSWellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMuch of the food available from takeaways, pubs and restaurants particularly that sold by independent outlets, is unhealthy and its consumption is increasing. These food outlets are therefore important potential targets for interventions to improve diet and thus prevent diet related chronic diseases. Local authorities in England have been charged with delivering interventions to increase the provision of healthy food choices in independent outlets, but prior research shows that few such interventions have been rigorously developed or evaluated. We aimed to learn from the experiences of professionals delivering interventions in independent food outlets in England to identify the operational challenges and their suggestions for best practice.

methodsWe used one-to-one semi-structured qualitative interviews to explore the views and experiences of professionals who were either employees of, or contracted by, a local authority to deliver interventions to increase the provision of healthier food choices in independent food outlets. Purposive sampling was used to recruit a sample which included men and women, from a range of professional roles, across different areas of England. Interviews were informed by a topic guide, and proceeded until no new themes emerged. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using the Framework method.

resultsWe conducted 11 individual interviews. Participants focussed on independent takeaways and their unhealthy food offerings, and highlighted the advantages and disadvantages of intervention delivery methods, their evaluation and impact. The main barriers to implementation of interventions in independent takeaways were identified as limited funding and the difficulties of engaging the food outlet owner/manager. Engagement was thought to be facilitated by delivering intensive, interactive and tailored interventions, clear and specific information, and incentives, whilst accounting for practical, primarily financial, constraints of food businesses. Alternative intervention approaches, targeting suppliers or customers, were suggested.

conclusionsParticipants emphasised independent takeaways as particularly challenging, but worthwhile intervention targets. Participants perceived that interventions need to take account of the potentially challenging operating environment, particularly the primacy of the profit motive. Upstream interventions, engaging suppliers, as well as those that drive consumer demand, may be worth exploring. Rigorous, evidence-informed development and evaluation of such interventions is needed.

Indexed as

CommerceDiet, HealthyFast FoodsRestaurantsAdultEnglandFemaleFood PreferencesHealth PromotionHumansMaleQualitative ResearchDietFood environmentsFood outletsHealth promotionInterventionPublic health nutritionQualitative methodsTakeaways

Identifiers

PMID29374480
PMCPMC5787327

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.