ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Development and Validation of a Set of Instruments to Measure Food Environments.
Review in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association Between Various Metrics of the Rural Food Environment and Diabetes and Obesity.Preventing chronic disease · 2026Article
- Geospatial Distribution of Food Environments and Their Association with Sociodemographic Factors in Two Mid-Sized Chilean Cities.Nutrients · 2026Observational
- Food access and associated socioeconomic factors in the Durham-Chapel Hill Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), North Carolina.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is worldwide interest in measuring local food environments (FEs). The aim of this study was to develop and validate a set of instruments to evaluate FEs in Chile.
methodsBased on the development and validation of four instruments to measure FEs, a literature review, an evaluation by experts, and the implementation of a pilot tool in the FEs of schoolchildren from nine public schools in the commune of Chillán, Chile, were used.
resultsA tool to evaluate FEs was provided, based on three dimensions: availability, variety, and advertising of healthy foods. A total of 1928 foods points of purchase were evaluated. The reliability was evaluated by Cronbach's alpha. Some 74% of the foods' points of purchase were store locations. The reliability of the four instruments was high to acceptable (store: 0.90; institution: 0.77; street food: 0.74; restaurant: 0.68). Unhealthy foods were highlighted by the scores obtained: store (6.08 ± 4.07; range: 0-13), restaurant (3.95 ± 1.75; range: 0-10), street food (1.18 ± 1.56; range: 0-7), and institution FEs (3.38 ± 2.78; range: 0-9).
conclusionsThe results of this tool can provide information to governments for incorporating structural measures to ensure adequate availability, variety, and advertising of healthy foods in different FEs.
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.