Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32787988›Full record

ArticlePublic health nutrition2021

Development and pilot of a tool to measure the healthiness of the in-store food environment.

Rachael Jaenke, Christel van den Boogaard, Emma McMahon, Julie Brimblecombe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public health nutrition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. The implementation and effectiveness of outlet-level healthy food and beverage accreditation schemes: A systematic review.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Sustaining Health Promotion in Australian Supermarkets: Qualitative Perspectives From the Reach for the Stars Programme.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors.

Rachael JaenkeWellbeing and Preventable Chronic Disease Division, Menzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Casuarina, Northern Territory, Australia.
Christel van den BoogaardWellbeing and Preventable Chronic Disease Division, Menzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Casuarina, Northern Territory, Australia.
Emma McMahonWellbeing and Preventable Chronic Disease Division, Menzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Casuarina, Northern Territory, Australia.
Julie BrimblecombeWellbeing and Preventable Chronic Disease Division, Menzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Casuarina, Northern Territory, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo rigorously develop a tool which enables rapid yet comprehensive appraisal of the consumer food retail environment and provision of real-time feedback to store managers and owners, based on the '4Ps' principles of marketing.

designMulti-stage iterative approach including (1) Systematic literature review; (2) Stakeholder consultation; (3) Assessment of existing tools against identified needs; (4) Tool development; (5) Pilot testing and (6) Transition of tool to mobile application (the Store Scout app).

settingNorthern Territory, Australia.

participantsNine remote Aboriginal community food stores; public health nutritionists, retailers, store board directors, Aboriginal community members, government representatives.

resultsForty-seven existing tools and thirty-four stakeholder interviews informed the development of the current instrument, which comprised: (1) seven product categories (Fruit & Vegetables, Drinks, Snack Foods, Meals & Convenience Foods, Meat & Seafood, Dairy & Eggs, Breads & Cereals) across the '4Ps' (Product, Placement, Price, Promotion); (2) Store manager questions about context and perceived importance of key principles about the store environment and (3) a scoring and feedback component. The tool was considered feasible and acceptable by all testers.

conclusionsThe developed tool addresses an unmet need to measure the consumer food retail environment across all 4Ps whilst also incorporating manager perspectives and immediate feedback. Our objectives of developing a comprehensive, feasible and acceptable instrument were achieved during pilot testing. The tool will support implementation of best practice within stores to encourage healthy food choices and has potential for broad application in retail settings locally and internationally, as well as for research purposes.

Indexed as

CommerceFood SupplyAustraliaFood PreferencesHumansMarketingConsumer nutrition environmentFood environmentFood retailStore surveyTool development

Identifiers

PMID32787988
PMCPMC7808860

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.