ArticlePloS one2025
Optimizing access to fruits and vegetables in rural communities: A decision-making model for the placement of produce markets.
Article in PloS one, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many rural communities experience limited access to fruits and vegetables (FV) and may benefit from food environment interventions to increase the number of produce markets selling FV. Systems analysis is an innovative approach for informing policy, systems, and environmental (PSE) change interventions for the food retail environment. However, there has been little research. This study describes a new decision-making model that optimizes placement of new FV markets in a rural community in Texas based on combinations of three intervention factors: recommended driving distance to nearest produce market, service capacity of new and existing FV markets, and financial resources. Models estimated the potential effects of three intervention outcomes: the number of new FV markets, the ratio of fast food outlets to FV markets, and population coverage. Secondary sources of data were used in the models. The analysis tested 27 different interventions and compared effects to a benchmark. The smallest increase in population coverage or the local population's access to FV was 19% compared to benchmark, while other interventions increased access to 100%. Models showed that the largest relative gain in access to FV, 29% to 37% for the local population, was at a lower level of financial resource availability ($1516171819-20,000). Findings provide evidence for the potential effects of food environment changes for one rural Texas community. Stakeholders can generate insights to inform context-specific decisions about their communities. In addition, this new decision-making model can be adapted for other communities to support PSE change interventions for nutrition.
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.