How different data sources and definitions of neighbourhood influence the association between food outlet availability and body mass index: a cross-sectional study

Matthew Hobbs, Mark Green, Claire Griffiths, Hannah Jordan, Joanna Saunders, Jim McKenna

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Inconsistencies in methodologies continue to inhibit understanding of the impact of the environment on body mass index (BMI). To estimate the effect of these differences, we assessed the impact of using different definitions of neighbourhood and data sets on associations between food outlet availability within the environment and BMI. Previous research has not extended this to show any differences in the strength of associations between food outlet availability and BMI across both different definitions of neighbourhood and data sets. Descriptive statistics showed differences in the number of food outlets, particularly other food retail outlets between different data sets and definitions of neighbourhood. Despite these differences, our key finding was that across both different definitions of neighbourhood and data sets, there was very little difference in size of associations between food outlets and BMI. Researchers should consider and transparently report the impact of methodological choices such as the definition of neighbourhood and acknowledge any differences in associations between the food environment and BMI.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)158-161
JournalPerspectives in Public Health
Volume137
Issue number3
Early online date9 Jun 2016
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 May 2017
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Food outlets
  • body mass index
  • density
  • buffer
  • Lower Layer Super Output Area
  • neighbourhood

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'How different data sources and definitions of neighbourhood influence the association between food outlet availability and body mass index: a cross-sectional study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this