Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34072176›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Diet and Economic Modelling to Improve the Quality and Affordability of the Australian Diet for Low and Medium Socioeconomic Households.

Michelle Blumfield, Carlene Starck, Tim Keighley, Peter Petocz, Anna Roesler, Kylie Abbott, Tim Cassettari, Skye Marshall, Flavia Fayet-Moore

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  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

9 authors.

Michelle BlumfieldDepartment of Science, Nutrition Research Australia, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6502-4121
Carlene StarckDepartment of Translational Science, Nutrition Research Australia, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2700-6002
Tim KeighleyDepartment of Science, Nutrition Research Australia, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9375-153X
Peter PetoczDepartment of Science, Nutrition Research Australia, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1266-0060
Anna RoeslerDepartment of Science, Nutrition Research Australia, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9446-4700
Kylie AbbottNutrition Research Australia, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia.
Tim CassettariDepartment of Translational Science, Nutrition Research Australia, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia.
Skye MarshallDepartment of Science, Nutrition Research Australia, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8953-5068
Flavia Fayet-MooreNutrition Research Australia, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Food costs are a barrier to healthier diet selections, particularly for low socioeconomic households who regularly choose processed foods containing refined grains, added sugars, and added fats. In this study, the objectives were to: (i) identify the nutrient density-to-cost ratio of Australian foods; (ii) model the impact of substituting foods with lower nutrient density-to-cost ratio with those with the highest nutrient density-to-cost ratio for diet quality and affordability in low and medium socioeconomic households; and (iii) evaluate food processing levels. Foods were categorized, coded for processing level, analysed for nutrient density and cost, and ranked by nutrient density-to-cost ratio. The top quartile of nutrient dense, low-cost foods included 54% unprocessed (vegetables and reduced fat dairy), 33% ultra-processed (fortified wholegrain bread and breakfast cereals <20 g sugars/100 g), and 13% processed (fruit juice and canned legumes). Using substitution modelling, diet quality improved by 52% for adults and 71% for children across all households, while diet affordability improved by 25% and 27% for low and medium socioeconomic households, respectively. The results indicate that the quality and affordability of the Australian diet can be improved when nutritious, low-cost foods are selected. Processing levels in the healthier modelled diets suggest that some ultra-processed foods may provide a beneficial source of nutrition when consumed within national food group recommendations.

Indexed as

DietDiet, HealthyAdultAustraliaChildCosts and Cost AnalysisFamily CharacteristicsHumansaffordabilitycost analysisdietdiet qualityfood-processingfood securitysocioeconomic

Identifiers

PMID34072176
PMCPMC8198747

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.