ArticlePublic health nutrition2022
On-campus food environment, purchase behaviours, preferences and opinions in a Norwegian university community.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Assessing the Healthfulness of University Food Environments: A Systematic Review of Methods and Tools.Nutrients · 2024Pooled it
- How Does the University Food Environment Impact Student Dietary Behaviors? A Systematic Review.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Pooled it
- Urban South African Adolescents' Perspectives on Healthy and Unhealthy Foods and the Drivers of Their Food Choices in Their School Food Environment: A Pilot Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Access to Food Establishments via Meal Delivery Applications: A Study of University and Non-University Settings in a Brazilian Metropolis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Instruments for assessing organisational food environments of workplaces: a scoping review.Public health nutrition · 2025Article
- Drivers and solutions to unhealthy food consumption by adolescents in urban slums, Kenya: a qualitative participatory study.Public health nutrition · 2025Article
- Energy and Nutritional Content of Lunch Menus in Turkish Universities: The Impact on Ecological Footprint.Food science & nutrition · 2025Article
- Exploring College Students' Acceptance of and Behavioral Intentions Toward Different Sorghum-Based Foods.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Changes in Availability and Affordability on the University Food Environment: The Potential Influence of the COVID-19 Pandemic.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- A Cross-Sectional Evaluation of the Food Environment at an Australian University Campus.Nutrients · 2023Article
- Development of the University Food Environment Assessment (Uni-Food) Tool and Process to Benchmark the Healthiness, Equity, and Environmental Sustainability of University Food Environments.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the food environment at OsloMet, through the nutritional profile and processing level of available commercial foods and drinks, as well as to determine food-purchasing behaviours, preferences and opinions on the food environment, in order to identify whether interventions on campus need to be conducted.
designCross-sectional descriptive study.
settingPilestredet and Kjeller campus of OsloMet (Norway).
participantsTo analyse the nutritional profile of products offered at all food outlets (seven canteens, three coffee shops and two vending machines) at the main campuses three criteria were applied: those proposed by the Spanish Agency for Food Safety and Nutrition, the UK nutrient profiling model and those of the Food and Drink Industry Professional Practices Committee Norway. In addition, products were classified by processing level, using the NOVA system. Food purchasing, food choice behaviours and opinions were analysed through a survey online, in which 129 subjects participated.
resultsWith regard to the first of the objectives, the combination of the above-mentioned criteria showed that 39·8 % of the products were 'unhealthy' and 85·9 % were 'ultra-processed'. Regarding the second objective, the most important determinants of food choice were taste, convenience, and cost and nutrition/health value. The most common improvements suggested were lowering the cost, improving the allergen information on labelling and increasing the variety of fresh and healthy foods.
conclusionsA high proportion of the products offered were considered 'unhealthy' and highly processed. Interventions that improve food prices, availability and information on labelling would be well-received in this community.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.