Moayyed Hamid, Kelly Bridget, Feng Xiaoqi, Flood Victoria
School of Health and Society, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.
Early Start Research Institute, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.
Nutr Diet. 2017 Feb;74(1):29-35. doi: 10.1111/1747-0080.12286. Epub 2016 Jun 9.
To obtain expert consensus to develop and evaluate a rating system on the relative healthiness of Australian suburbs' food outlet types.
Twenty-four food outlet types and 10 local suburbs were identified from previous mapping studies and based on a scan of suburbs across one large Australian geographical region. Initial food outlet 'scores' for relative healthiness were proposed based on available literature, classified into five categories, from 'most' to 'least' healthy. In round 1 of a modified Delphi survey, participants, Australian public health and nutrition experts, were given each outlet type's definition and the proposed scores and invited to modify the scores based on their perceived 'healthiness'. In round 2, participants were able to revise or adjust their scores.
Median scores for food outlet types from both rounds highly correlated with the originally proposed scores (two-tailed Pearson's correlation coefficient 0.97 and 0.96, respectively, P = 0.01), and scores from round 1 highly correlated with those from round 2 (Pearson's coefficient 0.998, P = 0.01). Round 2 scores were used to calculate suburbs' overall food environment score, healthiness score, unhealthiness score and a ratio of unhealthiness to healthiness scores. There was strong positive correlation between suburbs' ratio of unhealthiness to healthiness scores and a previously recognised scoring ratio, Retail Food Environment Index (Spearman's rho 0.847, P < 0.01).
The study generated experts' consensus about relative healthiness of food outlet types found in Australian neighbourhoods. Proposed scores can be used to assess and compare healthiness of community food environments and to explore their associations with area characteristics, population's diet and health outcomes.
获得专家共识，以制定和评估澳大利亚郊区食品销售点类型相对健康程度的评级系统。
根据之前的地图研究，并扫描澳大利亚一个大地理区域内的郊区，确定了24种食品销售点类型和10个当地郊区。基于现有文献，提出了食品销售点相对健康程度的初始“分数”，分为从“最健康”到“最不健康”的五类。在改良德尔菲调查的第一轮中，向澳大利亚公共卫生和营养专家参与者提供每种销售点类型的定义和提议分数，并邀请他们根据自己感知的“健康程度”修改分数。在第二轮中，参与者能够修改或调整他们的分数。
两轮食品销售点类型的中位数分数与最初提议的分数高度相关（双尾皮尔逊相关系数分别为0.97和0.96，P = 0.01），第一轮分数与第二轮分数高度相关（皮尔逊系数0.998，P = 0.01）。使用第二轮分数计算郊区的整体食品环境分数、健康分数、不健康分数以及不健康与健康分数的比率。郊区不健康与健康分数的比率与先前认可的评分比率零售食品环境指数之间存在强正相关（斯皮尔曼等级相关系数0.847，P < 0.01）。
该研究得出了专家对澳大利亚社区中食品销售点类型相对健康程度的共识。提议的分数可用于评估和比较社区食品环境的健康程度，并探索它们与地区特征、居民饮食和健康结果之间的关联。
