Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37482784›Full record

ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2023

Obesity and environments external to the body.

Stanley Ulijaszek

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Stanley UlijaszekUnit for BioCultural Variation and Obesity, School of Anthropology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6PE, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6593-1103
University of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Studies of environment and obesity usually use epidemiologically tractable measures that are proxies for energy balance or macronutrient composition intake, mostly to identify individual behavioural changes for prevention or reduction of obesity, or inform policy. Of environments external to the body as they relate to obesity, the built environment and the food environment are considered among the most important. Incorporating human sociality into obesity and environments research enriches the field by offering possible ways for understanding obesity production via social stress, dietary preference, food consumption and physical activity. External environments are in flux, however, especially with changing urban form and social environmental hybridity since Web 2.0, with urban polycentricity and networked and online activity influencing obesity production in new ways. While the world's rural populations are experiencing the fastest increases in obesity, large urban populations benefit from scale in setting the physical conditions for physical activity and healthy food availability, with larger and polycentric cities having lower rates of obesity than smaller monocentric or dispersed cities. It is argued that built, food and social environments set the context for obesity production or its amelioration, with sociodemographic factors being more important than new phenomena such as digital and smart technologies. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue 'Causes of obesity: theories, conjectures and evidence (Part I)'.

Indexed as

Environment DesignObesityDietExerciseHumansSocial Environmentbody fatnessbuilt environmentfoodobesitypolycentricsociality

Identifiers

PMID37482784
PMCPMC10363702
OpenAlexW4385186169

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.