Toure Djeinam, Herforth Anna, Pelto Gretel H, Neufeld Lynnette M, Mbuya Mduduzi N N
Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition, Washington, DC, USA.
Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Curr Dev Nutr. 2021 Mar 13;5(4):nzab023. doi: 10.1093/cdn/nzab023. eCollection 2021 Apr.
Food systems are increasingly recognized as critical for advancing nutrition, and the food environment is viewed as the nexus between those systems and dietary consumption. Developing a measurement framework of the market food environment is a research priority, particularly for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), which face rapid shifts in markets, dietary patterns, and nutrition outcomes.
In this study, we sought to assess current conceptions and measures of the market food environment that could be adapted for use in LMICs.
We conducted a narrative review of the literature to identify measures of the market food environment in recent use. First, we identified and reviewed frameworks of the food environment for LMICs with a specific focus on the market food environment. Second, we compiled 141 unique measures of the market food environment from 20 articles into a list that was pile-sorted by 5 nutrition experts into domains. We then categorized the measures based on percentage agreement across all sorts. Finally, we compared measured and conceptual domains of the market food environment to identify measurement gaps and needed adaptations.
Conceptual frameworks provide differing definitions of the market food environment but conform in their definitions of food availability, price, marketing, and product characteristics. Greater clarity is needed in defining relevant vendor and product characteristics. Eight measured domains of the market food environment emerged from the literature review, with significant overlap among conceptual domains. Measurement gaps exist for food quality, safety, packaging, desirability, and convenience. Personal characteristics also emerged as measured domains, although these are not part of the food environment per se.
These results are a step toward elucidating how, why, and where we measure the market food environment in LMICs. Future research should focus on prioritizing the most meaningful methods and metrics and on developing new measures where gaps exist.
食品系统对于促进营养的重要性日益得到认可,而食品环境被视为这些系统与饮食消费之间的纽带。构建市场食品环境的衡量框架是一项研究重点,对于中低收入国家(LMICs)而言尤为如此,这些国家面临着市场、饮食模式和营养状况的快速变化。
在本研究中,我们旨在评估当前可适用于中低收入国家的市场食品环境的概念和衡量方法。
我们对文献进行了叙述性综述,以确定近期使用的市场食品环境衡量方法。首先,我们确定并综述了针对中低收入国家的食品环境框架,特别关注市场食品环境。其次,我们从20篇文章中整理出141种独特的市场食品环境衡量方法,并将其列入清单,由5位营养专家按照领域进行分类。然后,我们根据各类别的百分比一致性对这些衡量方法进行分类。最后,我们比较了市场食品环境的测量领域和概念领域,以识别测量差距和所需的调整。
概念框架对市场食品环境给出了不同的定义,但在食品可及性、价格、营销和产品特征的定义上是一致的。在定义相关供应商和产品特征方面需要更清晰的界定。文献综述中出现了八个市场食品环境的测量领域,概念领域之间存在显著重叠。在食品质量、安全、包装、吸引力和便利性方面存在测量差距。个人特征也作为测量领域出现,尽管这些本身并非食品环境的一部分。
这些结果是朝着阐明我们如何、为何以及在何处衡量中低收入国家的市场食品环境迈出的一步。未来的研究应侧重于优先考虑最有意义的方法和指标,并在存在差距的地方开发新的衡量方法。