ArticlePublic health nutrition2022
Social inequality in food consumption between 2008 and 2019 in Brazil.
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 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Eating and lifestyle habits associated with regular soft drinks consumption among Brazilian adolescents: National Survey of School Health, 2019.Revista brasileira de epidemiologia = Brazilian journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Consumption of in natura and ultra-processed foods in adults: an analysis of social, metabolic, and lifestyle determinants.Revista brasileira de epidemiologia = Brazilian journal of epidemiology · 2024Article
- Food consumption patterns in employees of Ethiopian institute of agricultural research.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Bioactive compounds intake in the Brazilian population: Trends and determinants of socioeconomic inequalities between 2008 and 2018.PloS one · 2023Article
- Availability and price of fruits and vegetables in the surroundings of food and nutrition public establishments.PloS one · 2023Article
- Changes in socioeconomic inequalities in food consumption among Brazilian adults in a 10-years period.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo analyse the trend of social inequality in food consumption among Brazilians from 2008 to 2019.
designTime series analyses using cross-sectional annual data from the Telephone Surveillance System (VIGITEL 2008-2019). Food consumption was evaluated through: (1) consumption of five or more portions of fruits and vegetables in ≥5 d/week; (2) consumption of beans in ≥5 d/week and (3) consumption of soft drinks or artificial juices in ≥5 d/week. Absolute inequality was assessed by the slope index of inequality (SII) and relative inequality by the concentration index (CIX). SII and CIX positive values indicate higher prevalence among more educated citizens and negative among less educated ones. Time trend was assessed by linear regression using weighted least squares.
setting26 Brazilian state capitals and the Federal District.
participants621 689 individuals ≥18 years.
resultsFruits and vegetable consumption was more prevalent among the more educated citizens, while beans were mostly consumed by the less educated, and soft drinks or artificial juices was more prevalent among individuals with intermediate education. The highest absolute inequality was found for beans (SII2019 -25·9). In 12 years, the absolute inequality increased for fruit and vegetable consumption (from SII2008 12·8 to SII2019 16·2), remained for beans (SII2008 -23·1 to SII2019 -25·9) and reduced for soft drinks or artificial juices (SII2008 8·7 to SII2019 0·4). Relative inequality was low and constant.
conclusionDespite the advances reducing inequalities in soft drinks or artificial juice consumption, the increase in the social gap for adequate consumption of fruits and vegetables is troublesome.
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.