Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33183279›Full record

ArticleNutrition journal2020

Food Outlets Dietary Risk (FODR) assessment tool: study protocol for assessing the public health nutrition risks of community food environments.

Claire Elizabeth Pulker, Georgina S A Trapp, Mark Fallows, Paula Hooper, Heather McKee, Christina Mary Pollard

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrition journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Claire Elizabeth PulkerSchool of Public Health, Curtin University, Kent Street, GPO Box U1987, Perth, Western Australia, 6845, Australia. c.pulker@curtin.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0003-0262-4135
Georgina S A TrappTelethon Kids Institute, The University of Western Australia, PO Box 855, West Perth, Western Australia, 6872, Australia.
Mark FallowsDepartment of Health of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, 6004, Australia.
Paula HooperSchool of Population and Global Health, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, Western Australia, 6009, Australia.
Heather McKeeTelethon Kids Institute, The University of Western Australia, PO Box 855, West Perth, Western Australia, 6872, Australia.
Christina Mary PollardSchool of Public Health, Curtin University, Kent Street, GPO Box U1987, Perth, Western Australia, 6845, Australia.
Curtin University · AUThe Kids Research Institute Australia · AUGovernment of Western Australia Department of Health · AUThe University of Western Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAvailability and accessibility of nutritious foods can vary according to the food outlets present within a neighbourhood or community. There is increasing evidence that community food environments influence food choice, diet and the risk of diet-related chronic disease, however contemporary community food environments assessments (e.g. unhealthy fast food outlets versus healthy supermarkets or fruit and vegetable shops) may be too simplistic to accurately summarise the complexities of their impacts on food choice. This study protocol describes the development of the Food Outlets Dietary Risk (FODR) assessment tool for use by local government in Perth, Western Australia.

methodsSimilar to food safety risk assessment, the FODR assessment tool rates the potential harmful public health nutrition impact of food outlets by identifying and characterising the issues, and assessing the risk of exposure. Scores are attributed to six public health nutrition attributes: 1) availability of nutrient-poor foods; 2) availability of nutritious foods; 3) acceptability and appeal; 4) accessibility; 5) type of business operation; and 6) complex food outlet considerations. Food retail outlets are then classified as having a low, medium, high or very high dietary risk based on their total score. DISCUSSION: A local government administered tool to rate the public health nutrition risk of food outlets requires data which can be collected during routine assessments or sourced from the internet. The ongoing categorical classification of foods available within food outlets as either unhealthy or nutritious will require nutrition scientists' input. An objective risk assessment of the dietary impact of food retail outlets can guide local government planning, policies and interventions to create supportive community food environments. It is intended that locally relevant data can be sourced throughout Australia and in other countries to apply the local context to the FODR assessment tool. Utility and acceptability of the tool will be tested, and consultation with environmental health officers and public health practitioners will inform future iterations.

Indexed as

Fast FoodsPublic HealthDietEnvironmentFood SupplyHumansResidence CharacteristicsCommunity food environmentsDietFast food outletFood outletFood retailLocal governmentRisk assessmentSupermarket

Identifiers

PMID33183279
PMCPMC7663896
OpenAlexW3098369120

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.