Offline to online: a systematic mapping review of evidence to inform nutrition-related policies applicable to online food delivery platforms.

IF 7 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Si Si Jia, Allyson R Todd, Lana Vanderlee, Penny Farrell, Margaret Allman-Farinelli, Gary Sacks, Alice A Gibson, Stephanie R Partridge
{"title":"Offline to online: a systematic mapping review of evidence to inform nutrition-related policies applicable to online food delivery platforms.","authors":"Si Si Jia, Allyson R Todd, Lana Vanderlee, Penny Farrell, Margaret Allman-Farinelli, Gary Sacks, Alice A Gibson, Stephanie R Partridge","doi":"10.1186/s12916-024-03747-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Online food delivery (OFD) platforms offer easy access to an abundance of energy-dense and nutrient-poor takeaway foods and may exacerbate existing unhealthy food environments. Efforts to improve population diets include a range of policy recommendations focused on improving the healthiness of food environments; however, the way in which such policies may apply to OFD platforms is not clear. This paper aimed to synthesise the existing evidence to inform nutrition-related policies applicable to OFD platforms for population health and well-being. A secondary aim was to scan existing nutrition-related policies in Australia and internationally, which have the potential to be applicable to OFD platforms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Seven electronic databases including Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Business Source Ultimate, Scopus, Web of Science, and Proquest were searched from January 2010 to October 2023. Evidence from studies was mapped to five existing policy domains outlined by the Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI) including (i) food labelling; (ii) food promotion; (iii) food composition and nutritional quality; (iv) food retail; and (v) food pricing. Relevant data sources were searched for currently implemented nutrition-related government policies that may have relevance to OFD platforms.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 2012 records were screened, and 43 studies were included. There were 70 relevant study outcomes across the included studies, which addressed one or more of the 5 domains. Of these, 21 were relevant to 'Food Promotion' (30%), 18 to 'Food Retail' (26%), 15 to 'Food Composition (21%), 11 to 'Food Prices' (16%), and six to 'Food Labelling' (9%). Three existing policies from international jurisdictions (England, Singapore, EU) included OFD platforms, of which one was a voluntary measure. Several existing policies under food labelling have the potential to be amended to include OFD platforms under regulatory definitions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>OFD platforms have emerged as a disruptor to how people acquire their food and have yet to be widely included in existing nutrition-related policies. Advancing the evidence base to support the design of effective policy actions and mitigate the potential negative health impacts of OFD platforms will support efforts to improve population diets.</p>","PeriodicalId":9188,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medicine","volume":"22 1","pages":"542"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11575118/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-024-03747-8","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Online food delivery (OFD) platforms offer easy access to an abundance of energy-dense and nutrient-poor takeaway foods and may exacerbate existing unhealthy food environments. Efforts to improve population diets include a range of policy recommendations focused on improving the healthiness of food environments; however, the way in which such policies may apply to OFD platforms is not clear. This paper aimed to synthesise the existing evidence to inform nutrition-related policies applicable to OFD platforms for population health and well-being. A secondary aim was to scan existing nutrition-related policies in Australia and internationally, which have the potential to be applicable to OFD platforms.

Methods: Seven electronic databases including Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Business Source Ultimate, Scopus, Web of Science, and Proquest were searched from January 2010 to October 2023. Evidence from studies was mapped to five existing policy domains outlined by the Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI) including (i) food labelling; (ii) food promotion; (iii) food composition and nutritional quality; (iv) food retail; and (v) food pricing. Relevant data sources were searched for currently implemented nutrition-related government policies that may have relevance to OFD platforms.

Results: A total of 2012 records were screened, and 43 studies were included. There were 70 relevant study outcomes across the included studies, which addressed one or more of the 5 domains. Of these, 21 were relevant to 'Food Promotion' (30%), 18 to 'Food Retail' (26%), 15 to 'Food Composition (21%), 11 to 'Food Prices' (16%), and six to 'Food Labelling' (9%). Three existing policies from international jurisdictions (England, Singapore, EU) included OFD platforms, of which one was a voluntary measure. Several existing policies under food labelling have the potential to be amended to include OFD platforms under regulatory definitions.

Conclusion: OFD platforms have emerged as a disruptor to how people acquire their food and have yet to be widely included in existing nutrition-related policies. Advancing the evidence base to support the design of effective policy actions and mitigate the potential negative health impacts of OFD platforms will support efforts to improve population diets.

从线下到线上:对适用于在线食品交付平台的营养相关政策的证据进行系统性映射审查。
背景:在线外卖(OFD)平台提供了获取大量高能量、低营养的外卖食品的便捷途径,可能会加剧现有的不健康食品环境。改善居民饮食的努力包括一系列以改善食品环境健康为重点的政策建议;然而,这些政策如何适用于外卖平台尚不清楚。本文旨在综合现有证据,为适用于促进人口健康和福祉的外包店平台的营养相关政策提供信息。另一个目的是扫描澳大利亚和国际上现有的营养相关政策,这些政策有可能适用于外向型发展平台:从 2010 年 1 月到 2023 年 10 月,对 Medline、Embase、CINAHL、Business Source Ultimate、Scopus、Web of Science 和 Proquest 等七个电子数据库进行了检索。将研究证据与健康食品环境政策指数(Food-EPI)列出的五个现有政策领域进行比对,包括(i) 食品标签;(ii) 食品促销;(iii) 食品成分和营养质量;(iv) 食品零售;以及 (v) 食品定价。在相关数据源中搜索了目前实施的与营养相关的政府政策,这些政策可能与 OFD 平台有关:结果:共筛选出 2012 条记录,其中包括 43 项研究。在纳入的研究中,有 70 项相关研究成果涉及 5 个领域中的一个或多个领域。其中,21 项与 "食品促销 "相关(30%),18 项与 "食品零售 "相关(26%),15 项与 "食品成分 "相关(21%),11 项与 "食品价格 "相关(16%),6 项与 "食品标签 "相关(9%)。三項來自國際司法管轄區(英格蘭、新加坡和歐盟)的現 行政策包括外匯基金平台,其中一項屬自願措施。食品标签下的几项现有政策有可能进行修订,将OFD平台纳入监管定义:结论:OFD 平台的出现颠覆了人们获取食物的方式,但尚未被广泛纳入现有的营养相关政策。加强证据基础以支持设计有效的政策行动并减轻外购食品平台对健康的潜在负面影响,将有助于改善人们的饮食。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Medicine
BMC Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
13.10
自引率
1.10%
发文量
435
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medicine is an open access, transparent peer-reviewed general medical journal. It is the flagship journal of the BMC series and publishes outstanding and influential research in various areas including clinical practice, translational medicine, medical and health advances, public health, global health, policy, and general topics of interest to the biomedical and sociomedical professional communities. In addition to research articles, the journal also publishes stimulating debates, reviews, unique forum articles, and concise tutorials. All articles published in BMC Medicine are included in various databases such as Biological Abstracts, BIOSIS, CAS, Citebase, Current contents, DOAJ, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Science Citation Index Expanded, OAIster, SCImago, Scopus, SOCOLAR, and Zetoc.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信