Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38011397›Full record

ArticleHealth promotion international2023

Protecting children from unhealthy food marketing: a comparative policy analysis in Australia, Fiji and Thailand.

Anne Marie Thow, Sirinya Phulkerd, Yandisa Ngqangashe, Amerita Ravuvu, Liza Zaruba, Carmen Huckel Schneider, Jeff Collin, Ashley Schram, Sharon Friel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health promotion international, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Anne Marie ThowFaculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, Menzies Centre for Health Policy and Economics, Charles Perkins Centre (D17), The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6460-5864
Sirinya PhulkerdInstitute for Population and Social Research, Mahidol University, Phutthamonthon, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand.
Yandisa NgqangasheAustralian Research Centre for Health Equity, School of Regulation and Global Governance, Fellows Road, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, 2600, Australia.
Amerita RavuvuNon-Communicable Disease (NCD) Prevention and Control Programme, Public Health Division, Pacific Community (SPC), Private Mail Bag, Suva, Fiji.
Liza ZarubaIndependent Researcher, USA.
Carmen Huckel SchneiderFaculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, Menzies Centre for Health Policy and Economics, Charles Perkins Centre (D17), The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Jeff CollinGlobal Health Policy Unit, Social Policy, School of Social and Political Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH8 9YL, UK.
Ashley SchramAustralian Research Centre for Health Equity, School of Regulation and Global Governance, Fellows Road, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, 2600, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5231-6291
Sharon FrielAustralian Research Centre for Health Equity, School of Regulation and Global Governance, Fellows Road, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, 2600, Australia.

Funding

Australian Research Council DP190100576
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Restrictions on marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages to children is a globally recommended policy measure to improve diets and health. The aim of the analysis was to identify opportunities to enable policy learning and shift beliefs of relevant actors, to engender policy progress on restrictions on marketing of unhealthy foods to children. We drew on the Advocacy Coalition Framework to thematically analyse data from qualitative policy interviews conducted Australia (n = 24), Fiji (n = 10) and Thailand (n = 20). In all three countries two clear and opposing advocacy coalitions were evident within the policy subsystem related to regulation of unhealthy food marketing, which we termed the 'strengthen regulation' and 'minimal/self regulation' coalitions. Contributors to policy stasis on this issue were identified as tensions between public health and economic objectives of government, and limited formal and informal spaces for productive dialogue. The analysis also identified opportunities for policy learning that could enable policy progress on restrictions on marketing of unhealthy foods to children as: taking an incremental approach to policy change, defining permitted (rather than restricted) foods, investing in new public health expertise related to emerging marketing approaches and scaling up of monitoring of impacts. The insights from this study are likely to be relevant to many countries seeking to strengthen regulation of marketing to children, in response to recent global recommendations.

Indexed as

FoodMarketingBeveragesChildFijiHumansPolicyPolicy MakingThailandchildrencoalitionmarketingnutritionpolicy

Identifiers

PMID38011397
PMCPMC10681351

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.