SynthesisBMC public health2025
Towards a comprehensive school food environment audit tool in Canada: a systematic review of school food environment measurements and nutrition determinants.
Synthesis 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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSchool food programs (SFPs) support children's health, learning, and well-being, yet Canada remains one of the few high-income countries without a nationally coordinated SFP. Instead, a patchwork of independent programs has created disparities in access, funding, and quality. In 2024, the federal government released Canada's first National School Food Policy built on principles of accessibility, health promotion, inclusivity, flexibility, sustainability, and accountability, and committed $1 billion over five years. However, no clear frameworks exist for implementation or evaluation. This review examines existing measurement tools to identify captured dimensions of school food environments and student nutrition determinants, and assess alignment with Canada's National School Food Policy to inform the development of a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation tool for Canada's forthcoming national SFP.
methodsA systematic search of peer reviewed literature published prior to 2024 was conducted to identify measurement tools used to assess school food environments. Tools were categorized using three complementary frameworks: INFORMAS (food environment), the CDC School Nutrition Environment Framework (school policies/practices), and the Graziose Framework (student behaviors). A sub-analysis of Canadian tools assessed alignment with the National School Food Policy.
resultsOf 695 articles screened, 101 met the inclusion criteria. Most tools used quantitative methods (61%), while others used qualitative (15%) or mixed (34%) methods. No single tool captured all relevant dimensions of school food environments or factors influencing students' nutrition behaviors. The physical dimension was most commonly captured (92%) and the economic dimension the least (26%). School meals (75%) and Smart snacks (60%) were commonly measured, while staff role modelling was rarely included (10%). Most studies measured school policy (83%) and meal-specific factors (72%). Of the 7 Canadian tools, none captured all six principles of Canada's National School Food Policy. Most tools were rated as 'medium' (48%) or 'low' quality (35%).
conclusionsExisting tools show methodological gaps and are limited coverage, highlighting the need for more comprehensive and high-quality audit tools. For Canada, such a tool must also capture all six principles of the National School Food Policy to support implementation, evaluation, and accountability of the forthcoming national SFP.
trial registrationCRD42023492602.
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.