4.7 Article

Development of a Scoring Tool for Australian Rural Food Retail Environments

期刊

NUTRIENTS
卷 15, 期 21, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu15214660

关键词

rural; food environment; food retail; diet; nutrition

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to adapt existing Australian scoring tools for food retail outlets to represent rural locations. Through a modified Delphi technique, rural nutrition experts were engaged to modify and develop a tool that reflects the unique characteristics of rural retail outlets. The developed tool accurately assesses the healthiness of food outlets in rural areas and is important in studying the link between the food environment and health in rural populations.
Current tools scoring the healthiness of food retail outlets do not reflect outlets found in rural locations. This study aimed to adapt pre-existing Australian scoring tools to represent non-metropolitan areas. Rural nutrition experts were identified, and a modified Delphi technique was used to adapt two pre-existing, food-scoring tools in five iterative stages. Stages included identifying all relevant outlets, providing a description and score for each, ensuring consistency between outlet scores and pre-existing, metro-centric tools, and providing instructions for correct use. Six rural nutrition experts were identified and engaged in the modified Delphi technique. The final tool consisted of 12 categories of food outlets and listed 35 individual outlets. Consistent with pre-existing Australian tools, scores ranged from +10 to -10 and included descriptions reflective of rural retail outlets. Scores were based on whether the majority of foods offered within the outlet were consistent with foods recommended in national health guidelines. The developed tool was designed to accommodate the diverse nature of food retail outlets found in non-metropolitan areas. This study assists in explaining the link between the food environment and health in populations living rurally.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据