ArticlePublic health nutrition2025
Instruments for assessing organisational food environments of workplaces: a scoping review.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo map out evidence on instruments for evaluating organisational food environments of workplaces and the components and dimensions considered in the identified instruments.
designA scoping review that includes studies published as of January 2005, the year of publication of the model developed by Glanz
resultsAfter a full reading, fifty-four articles were selected. Most were conducted in the United States and Brazil, although there were studies from sixteen countries. A total of thirty-six instruments were identified: nineteen were used in universities, eight in hospitals, and eleven in companies. No instrument included all components and dimensions of the conceptual model; however, three instruments included most of them. The most evaluated component was the internal level of eating spaces, and the most evaluated dimensions were the availability and quality of foods/beverages in eating spaces. Of the thirty-six instruments, twenty-nine reported some measure of validity or reproducibility. The limitation most reported by the studies was the non-generaliation of results because samples are limited.
conclusionsEvaluations of the organisational food environment of workplaces can be used for monitoring, planning interventions and formulating public policies for such places, thereby enhancing workers' health.
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.