ReviewObesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity2025
Simulated retail food environments: A literature review of systems science approaches to advance equity in access to healthy diets.
Review in Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Seeing Beyond GLP-1: A Systems View of Sustainable Obesity Care.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2026Review
- Causal Loop Diagrams of Food Systems, Diet, and Obesity: A Scoping Review of Methods, Contextual Factors, and Outcomes.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2025Article
- Simulated retail food environments: A literature review of systems science approaches to advance equity in access to healthy diets.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As researchers increasingly utilize systems science simulation modeling (SSSM), little is known about how and by whom SSSMs are being leveraged to address inequities in access to healthy diets. We evaluated the extent to which studies (n = 66) employing SSSM to examine retail food environments (RFEs): included three pillars of equity (social position, human capital, socioeconomic and political context) that shape RFEs and access to healthy diets; grounded model design and development in theory; engaged with diverse stakeholders and lived experiences related to RFEs; and translated model findings towards addressing inequities in RFEs. Most studies (n = 58) included some model characteristics related to social position (e.g., age). Characteristics related to human capital (e.g., meal planning skills) were the least integrated fundamental pillar (n = 15). All studies included some characteristics related to socioeconomic and political context; however, we found little to no incorporation of social contexts (e.g., cultural and societal norms). Regarding model design and development, less than one-third of studies specified theoretical frameworks or engaged with local domain experts and stakeholders. While certain research objectives and, consequently, model types lend themselves better than others to address key pillars that influence RFEs, findings show that models are not fully leveraging SSSMs to analyze the multiple, interacting dimensions - particularly social phenomena - influencing equity in access to healthy diets. Greater attention to engaging stakeholders and the role of human capital and social contexts will likely better equip models to more holistically examine equitable food access, including essential pathways and unintended consequences of programs and policies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.