↓ Skip to main content

A review of methods and tools to assess the implementation of government policies to create healthy food environments for preventing obesity and diet-related non-communicable diseases

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
241 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A review of methods and tools to assess the implementation of government policies to create healthy food environments for preventing obesity and diet-related non-communicable diseases
Published in
Implementation Science, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13012-016-0379-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sirinya Phulkerd, Mark Lawrence, Stefanie Vandevijvere, Gary Sacks, Anthony Worsley, Viroj Tangcharoensathien

Abstract

Policies to create healthy food environments are recognized as critical components of efforts to prevent obesity and diet-related non-communicable diseases. There has not been a systematic review of existing methods and tools used to assess the implementation of these government policies. The purpose of this study was to review methods and tools used for assessing the implementation of government policies to create healthy food environments. The study conducted a systematic literature search. Multiple databases as well as the grey literature were searched. All study designs and review papers on assessing the implementation of government policies to create healthy food environments were included. A quality assessment of the methods and tools identified from relevant studies was carried out using the following four criteria: comprehensiveness, relevance, generalizability and feasibility. This quality assessment was completed by two independent reviewers. The review identified 52 studies across different policy areas, levels and settings. Self-administered questionnaires and policy checklists were most commonly applied to assess the extent of policy implementation, whereas semi-structured interviews were most commonly used to evaluate the implementation process. Measures varied widely, with the existence of policy implementation the aspect most commonly assessed. The most frequently identified barriers and facilitators for policy implementation were infrastructure support, resources and stakeholder engagement. The assessment of policy implementation on food environments was usually undertaken in combination with other policy areas, particularly nutrition education and physical activity. Three tools/methods were rated 'high' quality and 13 tools/methods received 'medium' quality ratings. Harmonization of the available high-quality methods and tools is needed to ensure that assessment of government policy implementation can be compared across different countries and settings and over time. This will contribute to efforts to increase government accountability for their actions to improve the healthiness of food environments.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 241 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Suriname 1 <1%
Unknown 238 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 49 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 12%
Student > Bachelor 30 12%
Researcher 26 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 8%
Other 38 16%
Unknown 49 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 52 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 46 19%
Social Sciences 28 12%
Psychology 9 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 2%
Other 37 15%
Unknown 63 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 February 2016.
All research outputs
#1,358,472
of 7,277,183 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#478
of 979 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,895
of 320,838 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#31
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,277,183 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 979 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 320,838 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.