An 11‐country study to benchmark the implementation of recommended nutrition policies by national governments using the Healthy Food Environment Policy Index, 2015‐2018
An 11‐country study to benchmark the implementation of recommended nutrition policies by national governments using the Healthy Food Environment Policy Index, 2015‐2018
复制标题
一项针对 11 个国家的研究，利用 2015 年至 2018 年健康食品环境政策指数对各国政府建议的营养政策的实施情况进行基准评估
DOI：
10.1111/obr.12819
复制
发表时间：
2019
期刊：
影响因子：
8.9
通讯作者：
B. Swinburn
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Vandevijvere;S. Barquera;Gabriela Cáceres;C. Corvalán;T. Karupaiah;M. F. Kroker;M. L’Abbé;S. Ng;S. Phulkerd;M. Ramírez;S. Rebello;M. Reyes;G. Sacks;Carmen María Sánchez Nóchez;Karina Sanchez;D. Sanders;M. Spires;R. Swart;V. Tangcharoensathien;Zoey Tay;Anna Taylor;L. Tolentino;R. V. van Dam;L. Vanderlee;F. Watson;C. Whitton;B. Swinburn
健康食品环境政策指数（Food‐EPI）旨在评估各国政府推荐的食品环境政策的实施程度，并与国际最佳做法进行比较，并优先采取行动填补实施差距。食品- EPI在6个地区的11个国家应用（2015 - 2018）。国家公共卫生营养小组（n = 11‐101名专家）使用经政府官员核实的证据文件，对本国政府实施47项政策和基础设施支持良好做法指标的程度与最佳做法进行了评级。专家们确定了解决执行差距的行动并确定了行动的优先顺序。比较了各国“非常低（如果有的话）”、“低”、“中”和“高”实施指标的比例、食品- EPI总体得分和优先行动领域。量表间信度良好（GwetAC2 = 0.6‐0.8）。智利有最高比例的政策（13%）被评为“高”执行，而危地马拉有最高比例的政策（83%）被评为“非常低”执行。澳大利亚、英国、智利和新加坡的总体食品EPI得分为“中等”，而危地马拉的得分“非常低”。最常优先考虑的政策领域包括对不健康食品征税、限制不健康食品促销和包装正面标签。食品EPI被认为是衡量政府在创造健康食品环境方面取得进展的有力工具和过程。
The Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food‐EPI) aims to assess the extent of implementation of recommended food environment policies by governments compared with international best practices and prioritize actions to fill implementation gaps. The Food‐EPI was applied in 11 countries across six regions (2015‐2018). National public health nutrition panels (n = 11‐101 experts) rated the extent of implementation of 47 policy and infrastructure support good practice indicators by their government(s) against best practices, using an evidence document verified by government officials. Experts identified and prioritized actions to address implementation gaps. The proportion of indicators at “very low if any,” “low,” “medium,” and “high” implementation, overall Food‐EPI scores, and priority action areas were compared across countries. Inter‐rater reliability was good (GwetAC2 = 0.6‐0.8). Chile had the highest proportion of policies (13%) rated at “high” implementation, while Guatemala had the highest proportion of policies (83%) rated at “very low if any” implementation. The overall Food‐EPI score was “medium” for Australia, England, Chile, and Singapore, while “very low if any” for Guatemala. Policy areas most frequently prioritized included taxes on unhealthy foods, restricting unhealthy food promotion and front‐of‐pack labelling. The Food‐EPI was found to be a robust tool and process to benchmark governments' progress to create healthy food environments.