ArticlePublic health nutrition2023
What counts? Adding nuance to retail food environment measurement tools in a Canadian context.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2023. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Islands in an Obesogenic Ocean: A Multiscale Spatial Analysis of School Neighborhood Food Environments in Michigan.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Measuring associations between the food environment and dietary habits: comparing the proportion and density of food outlets.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Association between geospatial disparities in food security with weight loss and nutritional outcomes of metabolic surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveLimitations of traditional geospatial measures, like the modified Retail Food Environment Index (mRFEI), are well documented. In response, we aimed to: (1) extend existing food environment measures by inductively developing subcategories to increase the granularity of healthy
designWe expanded the mRFEI measure such that 'healthy' food retailers included grocery stores, supermarkets, hypermarkets, wholesalers, bulk food stores, produce outlets, butchers, delis, fish and seafood shops, juice/smoothie bars, and fresh and healthy quick-service retailers; and 'less healthy' food retailers included fast-food restaurants, convenience stores, coffee shops, dollar stores, pharmacies, bubble tea restaurants, candy stores, frozen dessert restaurants, bakeries, and food trucks. Based on 2021 government food premise licences, we used geographic information systems software to evaluate spatial accessibility of healthy and less healthy food retailers across census tracts and in proximity to schools, calculating differences between the traditional
settingCalgary and Edmonton, Canada.
participantsN/A.
resultsOf the 10 828 food retailers geocoded, 26 % were included using traditional mRFEI measures, while 53 % were included using our expanded categorisation. Changes in mean mRFEI across census tracts were minimal, but the healthfulness of food environments surrounding schools significantly decreased.
conclusionsOverall, we show how our mRFEI adaptation, and transparent reporting on its use, can promote more nuanced and comprehensive food environment assessments to better support local research, policy and practice innovations.
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.