ArticleBMC nutrition2023
Dietary risk of donated food at an Australian food bank: an audit protocol.
Article in BMC 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Food handlers' insights into the barriers and facilitators to safe food handling in charitable food assistance programs in eThekwini District, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Investigating health professionals' perspectives and experiences of food security-related conversations in diabetes care.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2025Article
- Article
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
backgroundSufficient, safe and nutritious food is unattainable for many people experiencing severe food insecurity, putting them at dietary risk. Food banks, a growing part of the charitable food system (CFS), are the main source of food relief in developed countries. Donations of surplus, unsalable food from supermarkets, producers and manufacturers is the main source of the food supply, and this can be unpredictable, insufficient and inappropriate. The universal performance indicator of food-banking success is a weight-based measure, complemented by various initiatives to track the nutritional quality of food provided. There is currently no method that assesses the dietary risk of donated food related to nutrition and food safety. This protocol describes a method developed to identify and assess the dietary risk of donated food at an Australian food bank including the type, amount, nutrition quality, and food safety.
methodsAn audit of all food donated to a food bank servicing one Australian state was conducted over five consecutive days in May 2022. The audit process used a mobile device to take photographs of all incoming deliveries to the food bank. The images were manually annotated to document the type of food, product information (brand and product name, variety), the donor's name, weight (kilograms), and date-marking details. Data was extracted from the photographs and assessed against pre-determined dietary risk criterion for food safety (date marking, damaged packaging, visible food spoilage) and nutrition quality according to the principles of the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating, and the NOVA classification of level of processing. DISCUSSION: Fifteen hundred images were required to assess the dietary risk of 86,050 kg of donated food. There were 72 separate donations, largely from supermarkets and food manufacturers. Data analysis will enable identification of dietary risk, particularly for nutrition quality and food safety. This is important given the absence of food regulation for CFS donations, and the vulnerability of the client group. This protocol highlights the need for more transparency and accountability from food donors, about the food they donate.
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.