Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32957988›Full record

ArticleThe international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity2020

The use and misuse of ratio and proportion exposure measures in food environment research.

Lukar E Thornton, Karen E Lamb, Simon R White

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Lukar E ThorntonInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood, Australia. lukar.thornton@deakin.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0001-8759-8671
Karen E LambMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia.
Simon R WhiteMedical Research Council (MRC) Biostatistics Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe food stores within residential environments are increasingly investigated as a possible mechanism driving food behaviours and health outcomes. Whilst increased emphasis is being placed on the type of study designs used and how we measure the outcomes, surprisingly little attention gets diverted to the measures of the food environment beyond calls for standardised approaches for food store coding and geographic scales of exposure. Food environments are a challenging concept to measure and model and the use of ratio and proportion measures are becoming more common in food environment research. Whilst these are seemingly an advance on single store type indicators, such as simply counting the number of supermarkets or fast food restaurants present, they have several limitations that do not appear to have been fully considered. MAIN BODY: In this article we report on five issues related to the use of ratio and proportion food environment measures: 1) binary categorisation of food stores; 2) whether they truly reflect a more or less healthy food environment; 3) issues with these measures not reflecting the quantity of food stores; 4) difficulties when no stores are present; and 5) complications in statistical treatment and interpretation of ratio and proportion measures. Each of these issues are underappreciated in the literature to date and highlight that ratio and proportion measures need to be treated with caution.

conclusionCalls for the broader adoption of relative food environment measures may be misguided. Whilst we should continue to search for better ways to represent the complexity of food environments, ratio and proportion measures are unlikely to be the answer.

Indexed as

Data Interpretation, StatisticalFast FoodsFood MarketsRestaurantsFemaleHumansMaleResidence CharacteristicsSocial EnvironmentBuilt environmentDietary behavioursFood environmentNeighbourhoodObesity

Identifiers

PMID32957988
PMCPMC7507725

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.