Sharvari Patwardhan, Morgan Boncyk, Rasmi Avula, Christine E Blake, Fahmida Akter, Jai K Das, Renuka Silva, Purnima Menon, Samuel Scott
{"title":"南亚的食品获取、准备和消费实践:评估工具的范围审查。","authors":"Sharvari Patwardhan, Morgan Boncyk, Rasmi Avula, Christine E Blake, Fahmida Akter, Jai K Das, Renuka Silva, Purnima Menon, Samuel Scott","doi":"10.1016/j.advnut.2025.100518","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Assessing behaviors related to food choice at individual- and household-levels is essential for improving household diets, but assessment tools are limited. We conducted a scoping review to identify gaps in existing assessment tools for food acquisition, preparation, and household consumption practices in South Asia, where diets are rapidly changing. We undertook systematic keyword searches of three databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection) to identify studies assessing food acquisition, food preparation, and household consumption practices in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka, published in English between 2000 and April 2025. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts, and extracted data on study characteristics and the assessment tools used to examine the food choice behaviors. Of 13,160 unique articles identified, 50 were included for synthesis. Food acquisition behaviors (e.g., what and how often food is purchased, changes in food purchases) were assessed by 26 studies, food preparation (e.g., cooking habits, intra-household distribution of responsibilities, preparation methods) by nine studies, and household consumption practices (e.g., timing, snacking, meal skipping, eating away from the home) by 30 studies. Most studies used quantitative methods (n=34), some used qualitative methods (n=13), and few used mixed methods (n=3). Likert scales and semi-structured interviews were the most used tools for quantitative and qualitative assessments, respectively. Across the 50 studies, 40 different tools were used to assess food-related behaviors and only 14 studies claimed using validated tools. Few studies included a full tool in text or in supplemental material (n=23). Currently, there is little alignment on how to assess food choice behaviors in South Asia, highlighting the need for a contextually adaptable repository of tools. Adapting and validating existing tools, rather than creating new ones, could improve efficiency, continuity, and comparability. REGISTRY: Open Science Framework Registries REGISTRATION DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/5GPEF.</p>","PeriodicalId":72101,"journal":{"name":"Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)","volume":" ","pages":"100518"},"PeriodicalIF":9.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Food acquisition, preparation, and consumption practices in South Asia: A scoping review of assessment tools.\",\"authors\":\"Sharvari Patwardhan, Morgan Boncyk, Rasmi Avula, Christine E Blake, Fahmida Akter, Jai K Das, Renuka Silva, Purnima Menon, Samuel Scott\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.advnut.2025.100518\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Assessing behaviors related to food choice at individual- and household-levels is essential for improving household diets, but assessment tools are limited. We conducted a scoping review to identify gaps in existing assessment tools for food acquisition, preparation, and household consumption practices in South Asia, where diets are rapidly changing. We undertook systematic keyword searches of three databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection) to identify studies assessing food acquisition, food preparation, and household consumption practices in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka, published in English between 2000 and April 2025. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts, and extracted data on study characteristics and the assessment tools used to examine the food choice behaviors. Of 13,160 unique articles identified, 50 were included for synthesis. Food acquisition behaviors (e.g., what and how often food is purchased, changes in food purchases) were assessed by 26 studies, food preparation (e.g., cooking habits, intra-household distribution of responsibilities, preparation methods) by nine studies, and household consumption practices (e.g., timing, snacking, meal skipping, eating away from the home) by 30 studies. Most studies used quantitative methods (n=34), some used qualitative methods (n=13), and few used mixed methods (n=3). Likert scales and semi-structured interviews were the most used tools for quantitative and qualitative assessments, respectively. Across the 50 studies, 40 different tools were used to assess food-related behaviors and only 14 studies claimed using validated tools. Few studies included a full tool in text or in supplemental material (n=23). Currently, there is little alignment on how to assess food choice behaviors in South Asia, highlighting the need for a contextually adaptable repository of tools. Adapting and validating existing tools, rather than creating new ones, could improve efficiency, continuity, and comparability. REGISTRY: Open Science Framework Registries REGISTRATION DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/5GPEF.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72101,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"100518\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advnut.2025.100518\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advnut.2025.100518","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在个人和家庭层面评估与食物选择相关的行为对于改善家庭饮食至关重要,但评估工具有限。我们进行了范围审查,以确定南亚地区食品获取、准备和家庭消费实践的现有评估工具存在的差距,南亚地区的饮食正在迅速变化。我们对三个数据库(PubMed、Scopus和Web of Science Core Collection)进行了系统的关键字搜索,以确定2000年至2025年4月期间在阿富汗、孟加拉国、不丹、印度、马尔代夫、尼泊尔、巴基斯坦和斯里兰卡发表的评估食物获取、食物制备和家庭消费实践的研究。两位审稿人独立筛选标题、摘要和全文,并提取有关研究特征和用于检查食物选择行为的评估工具的数据。在鉴定出的13,160个独特文章中,有50个被纳入合成。26项研究评估了食物获取行为(例如,购买食物的种类和频率,购买食物的变化),9项研究评估了食物准备(例如,烹饪习惯,家庭内部责任分配,准备方法),30项研究评估了家庭消费实践(例如,时间,零食,不吃饭,离家吃饭)。多数研究采用定量方法(n=34),部分研究采用定性方法(n=13),少数研究采用混合方法(n=3)。李克特量表和半结构化访谈分别是定量和定性评估中最常用的工具。在这50项研究中,有40种不同的工具被用来评估与食物相关的行为,只有14项研究声称使用了经过验证的工具。很少有研究在文本或补充材料中包含完整的工具(n=23)。目前,在如何评估南亚的食物选择行为方面几乎没有一致意见,这突出表明需要一个适应环境的工具库。调整和验证现有的工具,而不是创建新的工具,可以提高效率、连续性和可比性。注册中心:开放科学框架注册中心DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/5GPEF。
Food acquisition, preparation, and consumption practices in South Asia: A scoping review of assessment tools.
Assessing behaviors related to food choice at individual- and household-levels is essential for improving household diets, but assessment tools are limited. We conducted a scoping review to identify gaps in existing assessment tools for food acquisition, preparation, and household consumption practices in South Asia, where diets are rapidly changing. We undertook systematic keyword searches of three databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection) to identify studies assessing food acquisition, food preparation, and household consumption practices in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka, published in English between 2000 and April 2025. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts, and extracted data on study characteristics and the assessment tools used to examine the food choice behaviors. Of 13,160 unique articles identified, 50 were included for synthesis. Food acquisition behaviors (e.g., what and how often food is purchased, changes in food purchases) were assessed by 26 studies, food preparation (e.g., cooking habits, intra-household distribution of responsibilities, preparation methods) by nine studies, and household consumption practices (e.g., timing, snacking, meal skipping, eating away from the home) by 30 studies. Most studies used quantitative methods (n=34), some used qualitative methods (n=13), and few used mixed methods (n=3). Likert scales and semi-structured interviews were the most used tools for quantitative and qualitative assessments, respectively. Across the 50 studies, 40 different tools were used to assess food-related behaviors and only 14 studies claimed using validated tools. Few studies included a full tool in text or in supplemental material (n=23). Currently, there is little alignment on how to assess food choice behaviors in South Asia, highlighting the need for a contextually adaptable repository of tools. Adapting and validating existing tools, rather than creating new ones, could improve efficiency, continuity, and comparability. REGISTRY: Open Science Framework Registries REGISTRATION DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/5GPEF.