Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39620537›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of health policy and management2024

Retailer Responses to Public Consultations on the Adoption of Takeaway Management Zones Around Schools: A Longitudinal Qualitative Analysis.

Matthew Keeble, Michael Chang, Daniel Derbyshire, Martin White, Jean Adams, Ben Amies-Cull, Steven Cummins, Suzan Hassan, Bochu Liu, Antonieta Medina-Lara and 9 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of health policy and management, 2024. 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

19 authors.

Matthew KeebleMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1512-7421
Michael ChangOffice for Health Improvement and Disparities, Department of Health and Social Care, London, UK.
Daniel DerbyshireDepartment of Public Health and Sports Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Martin WhiteMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1861-6757
Jean AdamsMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5733-7830
Ben Amies-CullNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Steven CumminsPopulation Health Innovation Lab, Department of Public Health, Environments & Society, Faculty of Public Health & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3957-4357
Suzan HassanPopulation Health Innovation Lab, Department of Public Health, Environments & Society, Faculty of Public Health & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Bochu LiuMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK.
Antonieta Medina-LaraDepartment of Public Health and Sports Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Oliver MyttonGreat Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3218-9912
Tarra L PenneyGlobal Food System and Policy Research, School of Global Health, Faculty of Health, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-4889-9102
John RahillyGreat Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK.
Nina RogersMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK.
Bea SavoryPopulation Health Innovation Lab, Department of Public Health, Environments & Society, Faculty of Public Health & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0009-0005-7159-4509
Annie SchiffMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6745-9954
Richard SmithDepartment of Public Health and Sports Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3837-6559
Claire ThompsonSchool of Health and Social Work, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0864-9811
Thomas BurgoineMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTakeaway food is often high in calories and served in portion sizes that exceed public health recommendations for fat, salt and sugar. This food is widely accessible in the neighbourhood food environment. As of 2019, of all local authorities in England (n=325), 41 had adopted urban planning interventions that can allow them to manage the opening of new takeaway outlets in "takeaway management zones around schools" (known elsewhere as "exclusion zones"). Before adoption, local authorities undertake mandatory public consultation where responses objecting to proposals can be submitted. Evidence on common objections could be insightful for practitioners and policy-makers considering this intervention.

methodsWe included 41 local authorities that adopted a takeaway management zone around schools between 2009 and 2019. We identified and analysed objections to proposals submitted by or on behalf of food retailers and local authority responses to these. We used reflexive thematic analysis with a commercial determinants of health lens to generate themes, and investigated if and how objections and responses changed over time.

resultsWe generated four themes: The role of takeaways in obesity, Takeaway management zone adoption, Use and interpretation of evidence, and managing external opinions. Despite not being implicated by the adoption of takeaway management zones around schools, planning consultants objected to proposals on behalf of transnational food retailers, however, independent takeaways did not respond. Objections attempted to determine the causes of poor diet and obesity, suggest alternative interventions to address them, undermine evidence justifying proposals, and influence perspectives about local authorities and their intervention. Objections consistently raised the same arguments, but over time became less explicit and expressed a willingness to partner with local authorities to develop alternative solutions.

conclusionObjections to local authority proposals to adopt an urban planning intervention that can stop new takeaways opening near schools featured strategies used by other industries to delay or prevent population health intervention adoption. Practitioners and policy-makers can use our findings when developing proposals for new takeaway management zones around schools. By using knowledge about their local context and addressing arguments against specific aspects of the intervention, they can pre-empt common objections.

Indexed as

Qualitative ResearchSchoolsCity PlanningCommerceEnglandFast FoodsHumansLongitudinal StudiesObesityRestaurantsChildhood ObesityCommercial Determinants of HealthFast FoodObesityThematic Analysis

Identifiers

PMID39620537
PMCPMC11496767

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.