Cited by 412Nutrition, Health and Food BehaviorNutritional Studies and DietObesity, Physical Activity, Diet

Are interventions to promote healthy eating equally effective for all? Systematic review of socioeconomic inequalities in impact

Open access
McGill, Rory, Anwar, Elspeth, Orton, Lois, Bromley, Helen, Lloyd-Williams, Ffion, O’Flaherty, Martin, Taylor-Robinson, David, Guzman-Castillo, Maria +9 more·2015·BMC Public Health

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Interventions to promote healthy eating make a potentially powerful contribution to the primary prevention of non communicable diseases. It is not known whether healthy eating interventions are equally effective among all sections of the population, nor whether they narrow or widen the health gap between rich and poor. We undertook a systematic review of interventions to promote healthy eating to identify whether impacts differ by socioeconomic position (SEP). METHODS: We searched five bibliographic databases using a pre-piloted search strategy. Retrieved articles were screened independently by two reviewers. Healthier diets were defined as the reduced intake of salt, sugar, trans-fats, saturated fat, total fat, or total calories, or increased consumption of fruit, vegetables and wholegrain. Studies were only included if quantitative results were presented by a measure of SEP. Extracted data were categorised with a modified version of the "4Ps" marketing mix, expanded to 6 "Ps": "Price, Place, Product, Prescriptive, Promotion, and Person". RESULTS: Our search identified 31,887 articles. Following screening, 36 studies were included: 18 "Price" interventions, 6 "Place" interventions, 1 "Product" intervention, zero "Prescriptive" interventions, 4 "Promotion" interventions, and 18 "Person" interventions. "Price" interventions were most effective in groups with lower SEP, and may therefore appear likely to reduce inequalities. All interventions that combined taxes and subsidies consistently decreased inequalities. Conversely, interventions categorised as "Person" had a greater impact with increasing SEP, and may therefore appear likely to reduce inequalities. All four dietary counselling interventions appear likely to widen inequalities. We did not find any "Prescriptive" interventions and only one "Product" intervention that presented differential results and had no impact by SEP. More "Place" interventions were identified and none of these interventions were judged as likely to widen inequalities. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions categorised by a "6 Ps" framework show differential effects on healthy eating outcomes by SEP. "Upstream" interventions categorised as "Price" appeared to decrease inequalities, and "downstream" "Person" interventions, especially dietary counselling seemed to increase inequalities. However the vast majority of studies identified did not explore differential effects by SEP. Interventions aimed at improving population health should be routinely evaluated for differential socioeconomic impact.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12889-015-1781-7

Cites

83 of 83 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McGill, R., Anwar, E., Orton, L., Bromley, H., Lloyd-Williams, F., O’Flaherty, M., Taylor-Robinson, D., Guzman-Castillo, M., Gillespie, D., Moreira, P., Allen, K., Hyseni, L., Calder, N., Petticrew, M., White, M., Whitehead, M., & Capewell, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Liverpool (GB)
  • London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
McGill, Rory
Venue
BMC Public Health
Published
2015-05-02
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
457-457
ISSN
1471-2458 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4239413439
Cited by
407
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 48 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 63 · 2020: 42 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 37 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 5
FWCI
4.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo
Funders
  • London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
  • Wellcome Trust (087636/Z/08/Z)
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • University of Exeter
  • University of Sheffield
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Medical Research Council (MR/K023187/1)
  • Economic and Social Research Council (ES/G007462/1, ES/G007470/1)
  • School for Public Health Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Keywords
healthy eating interventions, socioeconomic disparities, socioeconomic position, nutrition counseling, non-communicable disease prevention, dietary intake, fruit and vegetable intake, health disparities
MeSH terms
Commerce, Diet, Feeding Behavior, Health Education, Health Promotion, Humans, Socioeconomic Factors, Vegetables, Marketing

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