Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39953486›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2025

Equalising power imbalances or a trail of broken promises? A qualitative study on engaging people with diverse lived experience of marginalisation in food policymaking in Australia.

Carolina Venegas Hargous, Kevin Kapeke, Kathryn Backholer, Dheepa Jeyapalan, Veronica Nunez, Jennifer Browne, Anna Peeters, Alexandra Chung, Steven Allender, Victoria Stead and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Application of the Knowledge-to-Action framework in translating nutrition and dietetic knowledge into practice: A systematic review.Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

12 authors.

Carolina Venegas HargousGlobal Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, School of Health and Social Development, Institute for Health Transformation, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, 1 Gheringhap Street, Geelong, 3220, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3424-1756
Kevin KapekeThe Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth), Level 2, 355 Spencer Street, West Melbourne, Melbourne, 3003, Australia.
Kathryn BackholerGlobal Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, School of Health and Social Development, Institute for Health Transformation, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, 1 Gheringhap Street, Geelong, 3220, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3323-575X
Dheepa JeyapalanThe Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth), Level 2, 355 Spencer Street, West Melbourne, Melbourne, 3003, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-4470-1637
Veronica NunezThe Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth), Level 2, 355 Spencer Street, West Melbourne, Melbourne, 3003, Australia.
Jennifer BrowneGlobal Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, School of Health and Social Development, Institute for Health Transformation, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, 1 Gheringhap Street, Geelong, 3220, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6497-2541
Anna PeetersGlobal Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, School of Health and Social Development, Institute for Health Transformation, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, 1 Gheringhap Street, Geelong, 3220, Australia.
Alexandra ChungDepartment of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Level 1, 264 Ferntree Gully Road, Notting Hill, Melbourne, 3168, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7121-9534
Steven AllenderGlobal Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, School of Health and Social Development, Institute for Health Transformation, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, 1 Gheringhap Street, Geelong, 3220, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4842-3294
Victoria SteadSchool of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts and Education, Deakin University, 1 Gheringhap Street, Geelong, 3220, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0014-3189
Yin ParadiesAlfred Deakin Institute, Faculty of Arts and Education, Deakin University, 1 Gheringhap Street, Geelong, 3220, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9927-7074
Christina ZorbasGlobal Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, School of Health and Social Development, Institute for Health Transformation, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, 1 Gheringhap Street, Geelong, 3220, Australia. c.zorbas@deakin.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7343-2424

Funding

VicHealth n/a
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAchieving nutrition and health equity warrants understanding lived experiences of marginalisation. Yet, people with diverse lived experiences are often inadequately included in food policy advocacy, agenda setting, and development. We aimed to explore cross-sectoral perceptions of engaging people with lived experiences of marginalisation in food policymaking in Australia, specifically in terms of challenges, enablers, required actions, and potential outcomes of doing so.

methodsIn-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with 24 people with expertise in food policy and/or community engagement from academic, government, advocacy, and community sectors. Interviews were inductively and deductively coded using the Knowledge-to-Action framework.

resultsParticipants identified few food policymaking examples where people with lived experience have been meaningfully engaged. Reported barriers included the lack of time, resources, and prioritisation across sectors and the lack of political commitment to inclusive policymaking. Having access to successful examples, existing networks of actors and flexible funding were among the few enablers identified. Several actions were deemed necessary to effectively engage people with lived experience in food policymaking and improve current practice: (1) having a dedicated budget; (2) enabling true collaboration where people with lived experience are valued, effectively engaged, sufficiently represented, have the opportunity to work alongside decision-makers, and where power is equalised; (3) striving to do no harm to the people engaged; and (4) ensuring results from engaging people with lived experience are effectively disseminated.

conclusionsWe provide a list of practical recommendations to guide more inclusive, equitable and fit-for-purpose food policymaking into the future. These recommendations seek to challenge dominant systems of discrimination by demonstrating how we can tangibly shift to ways of working that value and elevate the power of people who are often excluded from many decision-making systems, specifically when it comes to food and nutrition.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationNutrition PolicyPolicy MakingPower, PsychologicalAdultAustraliaFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchDecision-makingFood policyLived experienceMarginalised voicesMeaningful engagementPolicymakingSystematic exclusion

Identifiers

PMID39953486
PMCPMC11827468

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.