Centre for Health Economics & Policy Innovation (CHEPI), Imperial College Business School, London, UK.
School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Obes Rev. 2021 Feb;22(2):e13176. doi: 10.1111/obr.13176.
The food environment has a significant influence on dietary choices, and interventions designed to modify the food environment could contribute to the prevention of childhood obesity. Many interventions have been implemented at the school level, but effectiveness in addressing childhood obesity remains unclear. We undertook a systematic review, a meta-analysis, and meta-regression analyses to assess the effectiveness of interventions on the food environment within and around schools to improve dietary intake and prevent childhood obesity. Estimates were pooled in a random-effects meta-analysis with stratification by anthropometric or dietary intake outcome. Risk of bias was formally assessed. One hundred papers were included. Interventions had a significant and meaningful effect on adiposity (body mass index [BMI] z score, standard mean difference: -0.12, 95% confidence interval: 0.15, 0.10) and fruit consumption (portions per day, standard mean difference: +0.19, 95% confidence interval: 0.16, 0.22) but not on vegetable intake. Risk of bias assessment indicated that n = 43 (81%) of non-randomized controlled studies presented a high risk of bias in the study design by not accounting for a control. Attrition bias (n = 34, 79%) and low protection of potential contamination (n = 41, 95%) presented the highest risk of bias for randomized controlled trials. Changes in the school food environment could improve children's dietary behavior and BMI, but policy actions are needed to improve surrounding school food environments to sustain healthy dietary intake and BMI.
食物环境对饮食选择有重大影响,而旨在改变食物环境的干预措施可能有助于预防儿童肥胖。许多干预措施已在学校层面实施,但在解决儿童肥胖问题上的有效性仍不清楚。我们进行了系统评价、荟萃分析和荟萃回归分析,以评估学校内外干预措施对食物环境的有效性,以改善饮食摄入并预防儿童肥胖。估计值以随机效应荟萃分析进行汇总,并按人体测量或饮食摄入结果进行分层。正式评估了偏倚风险。共纳入 100 篇论文。干预措施对肥胖(体重指数 [BMI] z 评分,标准均数差:-0.12,95%置信区间:0.15,0.10)和水果摄入量(份/天,标准均数差:+0.19,95%置信区间:0.16,0.22)有显著和有意义的影响,但对蔬菜摄入量没有影响。偏倚风险评估表明,43 项(81%)非随机对照研究在研究设计中未考虑对照,存在高偏倚风险。失访偏倚(n = 34,79%)和潜在污染保护低(n = 41,95%)对随机对照试验的偏倚风险最高。改变学校食物环境可以改善儿童的饮食行为和 BMI,但需要采取政策行动来改善周围学校的食物环境,以维持健康的饮食摄入和 BMI。