Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34070404›Full record

ArticleNutrients2021

Psycho-Behavioural Segmentation in Food and Nutrition: A Systematic Scoping Review of the Literature.

Eva L Jenkins, Samara Legrand, Linda Brennan, Annika Molenaar, Mike Reid, Tracy A McCaffrey

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrients, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Eva L JenkinsDepartment of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Notting Hill 3168, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8750-5818
Samara LegrandDepartment of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Notting Hill 3168, Australia.
Linda BrennanSchool of Media and Communication, RMIT University, Melbourne 3000, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1964-1487
Annika MolenaarDepartment of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Notting Hill 3168, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6037-4133
Mike ReidSchool of Economics, Finance and Marketing, RMIT University, Melbourne 3000, Australia.
Tracy A McCaffreyDepartment of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Notting Hill 3168, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9699-3083
Monash University · AURMIT University · AU

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council GNT1115496
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inadequate dietary intakes are a key modifiable risk factor to reduce the risk of developing non-communicable diseases. To encourage healthy eating and behaviour change, innovative public health interventions are required. Social marketing, in particular segmentation, can be used to understand and target specific population groups. However, segmentation often uses demographic factors, ignoring the reasons behind why people behave the way they do. This review aims to explore the food and nutrition related research that has utilised psycho-behavioural segmentation. Six databases from were searched in June 2020. Inclusion criteria were: published 2010 onwards, segmentation by psycho-behavioural variables, outcome related to food or nutrition, and healthy adult population over 18 years. 30 studies were included; most were quantitative (

Indexed as

Feeding BehaviorHealth BehaviorNutritional StatusAdultDietDiet, HealthyEatingFemaleFoodHealth PromotionHumansMaleSocial Marketingfoodnutritionpsycho-behavioural variablessegmentationsocial marketing

Identifiers

PMID34070404
PMCPMC8226652
OpenAlexW3164663435

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.