Evidence mapPaperPMID 35138570Full record

SynthesisCurrent atherosclerosis reports2022

Evidence Gaps in Assessments of the Healthiness of Online Supermarkets Highlight the Need for New Monitoring Tools: a Systematic Review.

Damian Maganja, Mia Miller, Kathy Trieu, Tailane Scapin, Adrian Cameron, Jason H Y Wu

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Current atherosclerosis reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Current food labelling practices in online supermarkets in Australia.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Damian MaganjaThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, 1 King St, Newtown, NSW, 2042, Australia. dmaganja@georgeinstitute.org.au.ORCID 0000-0003-1245-3288
Mia MillerThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, 1 King St, Newtown, NSW, 2042, Australia.
Kathy TrieuThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, 1 King St, Newtown, NSW, 2042, Australia.
Tailane ScapinGlobal Obesity Centre, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Melbourne, VIC, 3125, Australia.
Adrian CameronGlobal Obesity Centre, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Melbourne, VIC, 3125, Australia.
Jason H Y WuThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, 1 King St, Newtown, NSW, 2042, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewOnline grocery shopping is increasingly popular, but the extent to which these food environments encourage healthy or unhealthy purchases is unclear. This review identifies studies assessing the healthiness of real-world online supermarkets and frameworks to support future efforts. RECENT

findingsA total of 18 studies were included and 17 assessed aspects of online supermarkets. Pricing and promotional strategies were commonly applied to unhealthy products, while nutrition labelling may not meet regulated requirements or support consumer decision-making. Few studies investigated the different and specific ways online supermarkets can influence consumers. One framework for comprehensively capturing the healthiness of online supermarkets was identified, particularly highlighting the various ways retailers can tailor the environment to target individuals. Comprehensive assessments of online supermarkets can identify the potential to support or undermine healthy choices and dietary patterns. Common, validated instruments to facilitate consistent analysis and comparison are needed, particularly to investigate the new opportunities the online setting offers to influence consumers.

Indexed as

CommerceFood MarketsConsumer BehaviorFoodFood LabelingHumansConsumer purchasing behaviourDigital environmentsFood environmentFood marketingFood retailOnline supermarkets

Identifiers

PMID35138570
PMCPMC9023389

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.