MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404463532 · doi:10.1186/s12916-024-03747-8

Offline to online: a systematic mapping review of evidence to inform nutrition-related policies applicable to online food delivery platforms

2024· review· en· W4404463532 on OpenAlexaff
Si Si Jia, Allyson Todd, Lana Vanderlee, Penny Farrell, Margaret Allman‐Farinelli, Gary Sacks, Alice A. Gibson, Stephanie R. Partridge

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medicine · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicConsumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSystematic reviewFood deliveryData scienceMEDLINEMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Online food delivery (OFD) platforms offer easy access to an abundance of energy-dense and nutrient-poor takeaway foods and may exacerbate existing unhealthy food environments. Efforts to improve population diets include a range of policy recommendations focused on improving the healthiness of food environments; however, the way in which such policies may apply to OFD platforms is not clear. This paper aimed to synthesise the existing evidence to inform nutrition-related policies applicable to OFD platforms for population health and well-being. A secondary aim was to scan existing nutrition-related policies in Australia and internationally, which have the potential to be applicable to OFD platforms. METHODS: Seven electronic databases including Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Business Source Ultimate, Scopus, Web of Science, and Proquest were searched from January 2010 to October 2023. Evidence from studies was mapped to five existing policy domains outlined by the Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI) including (i) food labelling; (ii) food promotion; (iii) food composition and nutritional quality; (iv) food retail; and (v) food pricing. Relevant data sources were searched for currently implemented nutrition-related government policies that may have relevance to OFD platforms. RESULTS: A total of 2012 records were screened, and 43 studies were included. There were 70 relevant study outcomes across the included studies, which addressed one or more of the 5 domains. Of these, 21 were relevant to 'Food Promotion' (30%), 18 to 'Food Retail' (26%), 15 to 'Food Composition (21%), 11 to 'Food Prices' (16%), and six to 'Food Labelling' (9%). Three existing policies from international jurisdictions (England, Singapore, EU) included OFD platforms, of which one was a voluntary measure. Several existing policies under food labelling have the potential to be amended to include OFD platforms under regulatory definitions. CONCLUSION: OFD platforms have emerged as a disruptor to how people acquire their food and have yet to be widely included in existing nutrition-related policies. Advancing the evidence base to support the design of effective policy actions and mitigate the potential negative health impacts of OFD platforms will support efforts to improve population diets.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.114
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.114
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.006
Bibliometrics0.0300.033
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.292
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.145 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC MedicineSame topicConsumer Attitudes and Food LabelingFrench-language works237,207