Measuring the Food Environment
Open accessAbstract
The past decades have seen an increased interest in understanding how the environment affects population health. In particular, public health practitioners and researchers alike are eager to know how the food environments of neighborhoods, schools, and worksites affect food choices and, ultimately, population risk for obesity and other diet-related chronic disease. However, the measurement tools for assessing the environment and the employed study designs have limited our ability to gain important ground. The field has not yet fully considered the psychometric properties of the environmental measurement tools, or how to deal with the copious amounts of data generated from many environmental measures. The field is dominated by research using unsophisticated study designs and has frequently failed to see the role of social and individual factors and how they interrelate with the physical environment. This paper examines some of the measurement issues to be considered as public health practitioners and researchers attempt to understand the impact of the food environment on the health of communities and takes a broad look at where the science currently is with regard to how the food environment is measured, thoughts on what issues may benefit from more deliberate inspection, and directions for future work.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Several approaches are effective.
“Several approaches are effective (Table 6).152,196,202–214”
From Components of a Cardioprotective Diet: New Insights (2011) · cites this paper as [205]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 76 · Cited by 282
- Authors
- Lytle, L. A.
- Affiliations
- University of Minnesota (US)
- Corresponding author
- Lytle, Leslie A.
- Venue
- American Journal of Preventive Medicine
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-04
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- S134-S144
- ISSN
- 0749-3797 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC2716804
- OpenAlex
- W1573608357
- Cited by
- 282
- References
- 76
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 25
- FWCI
- 2.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- American Journal of Preventive Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Cancer Institute (HHSN261200700448P)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
- Social Sciences › Transportation › Urban Transport and Accessibility
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
- Keywords
- food environment, environmental measurement, psychometric properties, neighborhood food environment, schools, food choice, obesity, diet-related chronic diseases, research design, built environment
- MeSH terms
- Data Collection, Environment Design, Environmental Monitoring, Feeding Behavior, Food, Food Supply, Forecasting, Government Programs, Health Promotion, Humans, Obesity, Policy Making, Psychometrics, Social Environment, United States, Reproducibility of Results, Health Behavior, Nutrition Assessment, Nutrition Policy, Social Marketing, Evidence-Based Practice
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review