Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39511590›Full record

ArticleBMC medicine2024

Measuring characteristics of wild and cultivated food environments: a scoping review.

Penny Farrell, Erica Reeve, Ellen Johnson, Anna K Farmery, Dori Patay, Anne Marie Thow, Jonathan Wu, Jessica R Bogard

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Foraging, Farming or Shopping? A Decision Matrix Approach for Food Environment Assessments.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  4. 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

8 authors.

Penny FarrellThe University of Sydney, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, Menzies Centre for Health Policy & Economics, Level 5, Moore College CG2, 1 King St, Newtown, NSW, 2042, Australia. penny.farrell@sydney.edu.au.
Erica ReeveGlobal Obesity Centre, Institute for Health Transformation, School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, 1 Gheringhap Street, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Ellen JohnsonThe University of Sydney, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, Menzies Centre for Health Policy & Economics, Level 5, Moore College CG2, 1 King St, Newtown, NSW, 2042, Australia.
Anna K FarmeryAustralian National Centre for Ocean Resources and Security (ANCORS), University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.
Dori PatayThe University of Sydney, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, Menzies Centre for Health Policy & Economics, Level 5, Moore College CG2, 1 King St, Newtown, NSW, 2042, Australia.
Anne Marie ThowThe University of Sydney, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, Menzies Centre for Health Policy & Economics, Level 5, Moore College CG2, 1 King St, Newtown, NSW, 2042, Australia.
Jonathan WuThe University of Sydney, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, Menzies Centre for Health Policy & Economics, Level 5, Moore College CG2, 1 King St, Newtown, NSW, 2042, Australia.
Jessica R BogardAgriculture and Food, CSIRO, 306 Carmody Road St Lucia, Brisbane, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlobal food systems are essential to sustain life; however, unhealthy diets are the leading cause of poor health and death worldwide. Natural food environments are a critical source of healthful food such as fresh fruit and vegetables, lean meat and aquatic foods, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and Indigenous food systems. Understanding and monitoring natural food environments is critical to protecting the supply of healthy food, and the land and water it comes from, for current and future generations.

methodsA scoping review was applied to classify and summarise empirical methods and measures used for characterising natural food environments. The ways in which food environment characteristics are conceptualised and measured for natural (wild and cultivated) food environments were explored. Data were extracted from the included studies using the following fields: study country, aim/objective(s), type of natural food environment (wild vs. cultivated), method or measure used to measure the food environment, key food environment characteristic/s (up to four) measured and key findings in relation to the food environment measurement.

resultsOne hundred forty seven studies were found to be relevant in this review. Most studies investigated food environments in LMICs, with almost two-thirds of all studies focussing on middle-income countries (n = 89, 61%). There was a strong focus on food security and home-based agriculture from studies that measured the cultivated food environment in LMICs, while the majority of studies on the cultivated food environment from high-income countries focussed on urban and community gardening. In addition to the most common survey-based methodological approaches, our review yielded a broad range of both qualitative and quantitative methods for measuring natural food environments, such as geospatial analysis; biochemical analysis of food, soil and water; citizen science; photovoice and food availability calendars.

conclusionsOur review demonstrated that the concept and characteristics of the food environment are a promising conceptualization for measuring natural food environments, particularly in relation to food availability, healthiness and food security. Mapping the currently used methods and measures to assess natural food environments is important to help identify critical leverage points for strengthening policy interventions, and monitoring and evaluation of progress.

Indexed as

AgricultureFood SupplyDeveloping CountriesEnvironmentFood SecurityHumansCultivatedEnvironmental sustainabilityFood environmentsNaturalWild

Identifiers

PMID39511590
PMCPMC11545722

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.