Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38813402›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2024

Australians' willingness to change their discretionary food intake: findings from the CSIRO junk food analyser.

Chelsea E Mauch, Emily Brindal, Gilly A Hendrie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. 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
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

3 authors.

Chelsea E MauchHuman Health Program, Health and Biosecurity, CSIRO, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Emily BrindalHuman Health Program, Health and Biosecurity, CSIRO, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Gilly A HendrieHuman Health Program, Health and Biosecurity, CSIRO, Adelaide, SA, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Overconsumption of energy dense, nutrient poor foods and beverages is a major problem globally. This study describes what and how Australian adults consume and are willing to change their intake in terms of discretionary food and beverage categories. Methods: Cross-sectional data were collected via the CSIRO Junk Food Analyser. This online tool contains short questions on discretionary food and beverage consumption, and items relating to stage of and willingness and strategies to reduce discretionary food and beverage intake. Analyses focussed on describing discretionary intake, adherence to guidelines and the prediction of willingness to change discretionary food intake amongst those exceeding guidelines. Results: In 2021, 41,109 Australian adults completed the CSIRO Junk Food Analyser. Participants were mostly female (73.1%) and aged 31-70 years (78.9%). Most participants exceeded dietary guidelines for discretionary food and beverage intake (67.4%, 27,694/41,109) with 40% reporting actively trying to reduce intake. Most people exceeding guidelines did so in categories of alcohol (39.3%) and cakes and biscuits (21.0%). Yet, willingness to change intake was lowest for alcohol (median, IQR of 3, 2:4 out of 5). Almost half of the participants were willing to try 'having a few days off per week' (46.0%), while only 13.4% were willing to try to 'eliminate' their highest ranked category. Discussion: Australian adults are willing to reduce their discretionary food and beverage intake, but simply targeting the foods and beverages consumed most may not be the best place to start. Messages encouraging days off frequently consumed discretionary foods and beverages may be well received.

Indexed as

Feeding BehaviorAdultAgedAustralasian PeopleAustraliaCross-Sectional StudiesEatingEnergy IntakeFast FoodsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNutrition PolicySurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adultbehaviour changedietary intakediscretionary foodstage of changewillingness

Identifiers

PMID38813402
PMCPMC11133598

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.