Dataset Information

Suitability of Data-Collection Methods, Tools, and Metrics for Evaluating Market Food Environments in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

ABSTRACT: Globalization is transforming food environments in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) with implications for diets and nutrition. However, most food-environment assessments were developed for use in high-income countries. We evaluated the suitability of 113 data-collection assessments (i.e., methods, tools, and metrics) for eight dimensions of informal and formal market food environments for diverse contexts of LMICs. We used a scoring exercise and a survey of experts (n = 27). According to the scoring exercise, 10 assessments (8 methods, 1 tool, and 1 metric) were suitable without modification for informal markets. Suitability for formal markets was markedly higher, with 41 assessments (21 methods, 14 tools, and 6 metrics) found suitable without modification. Experts considered availability, accessibility, price, and affordability the most important dimensions of market food environments to evaluate in LMICs. Market-basket analysis and vendor audits (which include inventories) were ranked as the most suitable methods to assess multiple dimensions of market food environments, including availability, price, affordability, vendor and product characteristics, marketing, and regulation. Gaps in relevant assessments were found for convenience and desirability. Results demonstrate the need for the development, adaptation, and validation of assessments relevant for informal markets in a diverse range of LMIC contexts to support diets, nutrition, and health globally.

SUBMITTER: Ahmed S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8621112 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Suitability of Data-Collection Methods, Tools, and Metrics for Evaluating Market Food Environments in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Ahmed Selena S Kennedy Gina G Crum Jennifer J Vogliano Chris C McClung Sarah S Anderson Collin C

Foods (Basel, Switzerland) 20211108 11

Globalization is transforming food environments in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) with implications for diets and nutrition. However, most food-environment assessments were developed for use in high-income countries. We evaluated the suitability of 113 data-collection assessments (i.e., methods, tools, and metrics) for eight dimensions of informal and formal market food environments for diverse contexts of LMICs. We used a scoring exercise and a survey of experts (<i>n</i> = 27). Accor ...[more]

PMID: 34829009

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionHealth-related data collection tools, including digital ones, have become more prevalent across clinical studies in the last number of years. However, using digital data collection tools in low-income and middle-income countries presents unique challenges. In this review, we aim to provide an overview of the data collection tools currently being used in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in low-resource settings and evaluate the tools based on the characteristics outlined in the modified Mobile Survey Tool framework. These include functionality, reliability, usability, efficiency, maintainability, portability, effectiveness, cost-benefit, satisfaction, freedom from risk and context coverage. This evidence may provide a guide to selecting a suitable data collection tool for researchers planning to conduct research in low-income and middle-income countries for future studies.Methods and analysisSearches will be conducted in four electronic databases: PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science and EMBASE. For inclusion, studies must be a RCT, mention a health-related data collection tool and conducted in a low- and middle-income country. Only studies with available full-text and written in English will be included. The search was restricted to studies published between January 2005 and June 2023. This systematic review will use the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) tool. Two review authors will screen the titles and abstracts of search results independently for inclusion. In the initial screening process, the full-text articles will be retrieved if the abstract contains limited information about the study. Disagreements will be resolved through discussion. If the disagreement cannot be resolved, a third author (JO'D) will adjudicate. The study selection process will be outlined in a PRISMA flow-diagram. Data will be analysed using a narrative synthesis approach. The included studies and their outcomes will be presented in a table.Ethics and disseminationFormal ethical approval is not required as primary data will not be collected in this study. The findings from this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.Prospero registration numberCRD42023405738.

Project description:BackgroundFood systems are increasingly recognized as critical for advancing nutrition, and the food environment is viewed as the nexus between those systems and dietary consumption. Developing a measurement framework of the market food environment is a research priority, particularly for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), which face rapid shifts in markets, dietary patterns, and nutrition outcomes.ObjectivesIn this study, we sought to assess current conceptions and measures of the market food environment that could be adapted for use in LMICs.MethodsWe conducted a narrative review of the literature to identify measures of the market food environment in recent use. First, we identified and reviewed frameworks of the food environment for LMICs with a specific focus on the market food environment. Second, we compiled 141 unique measures of the market food environment from 20 articles into a list that was pile-sorted by 5 nutrition experts into domains. We then categorized the measures based on percentage agreement across all sorts. Finally, we compared measured and conceptual domains of the market food environment to identify measurement gaps and needed adaptations.ResultsConceptual frameworks provide differing definitions of the market food environment but conform in their definitions of food availability, price, marketing, and product characteristics. Greater clarity is needed in defining relevant vendor and product characteristics. Eight measured domains of the market food environment emerged from the literature review, with significant overlap among conceptual domains. Measurement gaps exist for food quality, safety, packaging, desirability, and convenience. Personal characteristics also emerged as measured domains, although these are not part of the food environment per se.ConclusionsThese results are a step toward elucidating how, why, and where we measure the market food environment in LMICs. Future research should focus on prioritizing the most meaningful methods and metrics and on developing new measures where gaps exist.

Project description:BackgroundUse of electronic data collection, management and analysis tools to support outbreak response is limited, especially in low income countries. This can hamper timely decision-making during outbreak response. Identifying available tools and assessing their functions in the context of outbreak response would support appropriate selection and use, and likely more timely data-driven decision-making during outbreaks.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review and a stakeholder survey of the Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network and other partners to identify and describe the use of, and technical characteristics of, electronic data tools used for outbreak response in low- and middle-income countries. Databases included were MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, Web of Science and CINAHL with publications related to tools for outbreak response included from January 2010-May 2020. Software tool websites of identified tools were also reviewed. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied and counts, and proportions of data obtained from the review or stakeholder survey were calculated.ResultsWe identified 75 electronic tools including for data collection (33/75), management (13/75) and analysis (49/75) based on data from the review and survey. Twenty-eight tools integrated all three functionalities upon collection of additional information from the tool developer websites. The majority were open source, capable of offline data collection and data visualisation. EpiInfo, KoBoCollect and Open Data Kit had the broadest use, including for health promotion, infection prevention and control, and surveillance data capture. Survey participants highlighted harmonisation of data tools as a key challenge in outbreaks and the need for preparedness through training front-line responders on data tools. In partnership with the Global Health Network, we created an online interactive decision-making tool using data derived from the survey and review.ConclusionsMany electronic tools are available for data -collection, -management and -analysis in outbreak response, but appropriate tool selection depends on knowledge of tools' functionalities and capabilities. The online decision-making tool created to assist selection of the most appropriate tool(s) for outbreak response helps by matching requirements with functionality. Applying the tool together with harmonisation of data formats, and training of front-line responders outside of epidemic periods can support more timely data-driven decision making in outbreaks.

Project description:ObjectiveAccurate reporting of birth outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) is essential. Mobile health (mHealth) tools have been proposed as a replacement for conventional paper-based registers. mHealth could provide timely data for individual facilities and health departments, as well as capture deliveries outside facilities. This scoping review evaluates which mHealth tools have been reported to birth outcomes in the delivering room in LMICs and documents their reported advantages and drawbacks.DesignA scoping review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for scoping reviews and the mHealth evidence reporting and assessment checklist for evaluating mHealth interventions.Data sourcesPubMed, CINAHL and Global Health were searched for records until 3 February 2022 with no earliest date limit.Eligibility criteriaStudies were included where healthcare workers used mHealth tools in LMICs to record birth outcomes. Exclusion criteria included mHealth not being used at the point of delivery, non-peer reviewed literature and studies not written in English.Data extraction and synthesisTwo independent reviewers screened studies and extracted data. Common themes among studies were identified.Results640 records were screened, 21 of which met the inclusion criteria, describing 15 different mHealth tools. We identified six themes: (1) digital tools for labour monitoring (8 studies); (2) digital data collection of specific birth outcomes (3 studies); (3) digital technologies used in community settings (6 studies); (4) attitudes of healthcare workers (10 studies); (5) paper versus electronic data collection (3 studies) and (6) infrastructure, interoperability and sustainability (8 studies).ConclusionSeveral mHealth technologies are reported to have the capability to record birth outcomes at delivery, but none were identified that were designed solely for that purpose. Use of digital delivery registers appears feasible and acceptable to healthcare workers, but definitive evaluations are lacking. Further assessment of the sustainability of technologies and their ability to integrate with existing health information systems is needed.

Dataset Information

Suitability of Data-Collection Methods, Tools, and Metrics for Evaluating Market Food Environments in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Publications

Suitability of Data-Collection Methods, Tools, and Metrics for Evaluating Market Food Environments in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets