Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40629308›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2025

The PEAR Tool: evaluating portion sizes of food and beverages in food advertising to children using Google Street View.

J Porter, R Roy, B Van der Werf, V Egli

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. 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

4 authors.

J PorterDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
R RoyDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
B Van der WerfDepartment of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
V EgliSchool of Health Equity and Innovation, Division of Health, The University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand. victoria.egli@waikato.ac.nz.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous research has established where and what types of advertising are in children's neighbourhoods. However, no prior research has evaluated the portion sizes in advertisements or how these compare with national dietary recommendations. This study aimed to evaluate portion sizes in advertising on bus shelters surrounding schools in Auckland, New Zealand using images captured on Google Street View. Portion sizes for 265 foods or beverages in 172 advertisements on bus shelters within 500 m of Auckland schools were analysed to determine the discrepancy with nutritional guidelines. School type, decile, distance from school boundary, Walk Score® and Transit Score were analysed. Advertised foods and beverages were exaggerated in all but one advertisement. The main findings demonstrate 1) advertised food and beverage products are enlarged, and 2) advertised portion sizes exceed those deemed appropriate in national nutrition guidelines. Stricter advertising policies with revised definitions are needed to improve the food environments surrounding schools.

Indexed as

AdvertisingBeveragesFoodPortion SizeChildHumansNew ZealandNutrition PolicyResidence CharacteristicsSchoolsChildrenFood advertisingGoogle Street ViewNeighbourhoodNew ZealandOutdoor advertisingPortion size

Identifiers

PMID40629308
PMCPMC12235823

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.