ReviewCurrent obesity reports2026
Prioritising Indicators for Large-scale Monitoring and Assessment of Food Environments for Public Health.
Review in Current obesity reports, 2026. 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
27 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewThis study aimed to prioritise key indicators for monitoring and assessing the healthiness of food environments, including at the country level. We conducted a literature review and engaged a consortium of researchers from the International Network for Food environments Research, Monitoring and Action Support (INFORMAS) as part of a prioritisation process. RECENT
findingsWe identified 375 existing indicators that had been used to measure food environments. Researchers were consulted on priorities and implementation considerations through a series of interviews, focus groups and an online survey. Sixteen indicators were short-listed for prioritisation, and five indicators were identified as key priorities: proportion of packaged food and drinks products classified as unhealthy; frequency of exposure to unhealthy food promotion; price of a healthy diet and the price of the current diet as a proportion of income; proportion of schools in which unhealthy foods are provided or available for sale regularly; and application of back of package and front of package food labelling. This study lays the groundwork for standardised and scalable food environment monitoring that can drive policy action to support healthier food environments globally. Future areas for inquiry include tools to classify healthy foods and outlets, which could be adapted across policy areas, and the establishment of evidence-informed benchmarks for assessment of each indicator.
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.