ArticleBMC nutrition2025
Benchmarking the healthiness, equity and environmental sustainability of university food environments in Australia, 2021/22.
Article in BMC nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Benchmarking the nutrition-related commitments and practices of major Belgian food companies by industry sector and over time (2019-2023/2024).BMC nutrition · 2026Article
- A Qualitative Exploration of Food Insecurity and Institutional Support Among International Students at a Regional Australian University.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2025Article
- How do they eat: a digital diet ethnography of dietary behavior determinants among New Zealand and Chinese university students.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFood environments on university campuses have an important influence on the diets of staff and students. This study aimed to assess the healthiness, equitability and environmental sustainability of Australian university food environments, and identify priority recommendations for policy and practice.
methodsWe applied the previously developed 'Uni-Food' tool in nine universities (17 campuses, 165 food retail outlets) in Australia between 2021 and 2022. Data on three components: (1) 'university systems and governance'; (2) 'campus facilities and environment'; and (3) 'food retail outlets' were collected from desk-based policy audits and in-person campus audits. Universities were given an overall score from 0-100, based on their performance across all components.
resultsUniversity scores ranged from 27/100 to 66/100 (median = 46). Universities scored highest in the 'campus facilities and environment' component, reflecting that the broad campus environment (including areas such as catering, advertising on campus, and food-related environmental sustainability initiatives) has been an area of focus. Universities scored lowest in the 'university systems and governance' component, reflecting a relative lack of policy action, funding and governance in this area, with few initiatives to promote the availability and affordability of healthy and environmentally sustainable foods.
conclusionStronger action is needed to improve Australian university food environments, including in food retail outlets, vending, catering and at campus events. Universities can demonstrate leadership by implementing university-wide policies that limit the availability of unhealthy foods and beverages (e.g. sugary drinks) on campus, and setting targets for the proportion of healthy and environmentally sustainable foods procured and sold on campus. Other stakeholders, including governments, can play a role in incentivising universities to adopt recommended actions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.