Mackenbach_2014 - Obesogenic environments: a systematic review of the association between the physical environment and adult weight status, the SPOTLIGHT project

Basic Article Info:

Article key Mackenbach_2014
Title Obesogenic environments: a systematic review of the association between the physical environment and adult weight status, the SPOTLIGHT project
Year 2014
Review type systematic review
Main topic Physical built environment factors and adult obesity
Subjects area(s) Environment and nature, Health and well-being
Built environment scale Community / Population group
Application(s) Innovation, Evaluation
Geographically focused no
Prisma diagram used no
Study focus start 1995
Study focus end 2013
Search string #1: Obesity[Mesh] OR obesity[tiab] OR overweight[Mesh] OR overweight[tiab] OR “body composition”[Mesh] OR “fat distribution”[Mesh] OR “body mass index”[Mesh] OR adiposity[Mesh] OR “weight loss”[Mesh] OR “waist circumference”[Mesh] OR “body mass index”[tiab] AND #2: “environmental influence”[tiab] OR “environmental influences”[tiab] OR “environmental determinant”[tiab] OR “environmental determinants”[tiab] OR “environmental factor”[tiab] OR “environmental factors”[tiab] OR “environmental support”[tiab] OR “environmental approach”[tiab] OR “environmental variable”[tiab] OR “environmental variables”[tiab] OR “environmental attribute”[tiab] OR “environmental attributes”[tiab] OR “environmental barrier”[tiab] OR “environmental barriers”[tiab] OR “environmental characteristic”[tiab] OR “environmental characteristics”[tiab] OR OR “environmental correlates”[tiab] OR “local environment”[tiab] OR “rural environment”[tiab] OR “urban environment”[tiab] OR “objective environment”[tiab] OR “perceived environment”[tiab] OR “measured environment”[tiab] OR “obesogenic environment”[tiab] OR “residence characteristics”[tiab] OR “environment design”[tiab] OR “neighborhood characteristics”[tiab] OR “neighbourhood characteristics”[tiab] OR geospatial[tiab] OR GIS[tiab] OR “food outlet”[tiab] OR “geographic information system”[tiab] OR “geographic information systems”[tiab] OR graffiti[tiab] OR aesthetics[tiab] OR streetlights[tiab] OR walkability[tiab] OR “accessibility”[tiab] OR “street connectivity”[tiab] OR “Cities/epidemiology”[Mesh] OR “city planning”[tiab] OR “built environment”[tiab] OR “built environments”[tiab] OR “physical environment”[tiab] OR park[tiab] OR parks[tiab] OR sidewalk[tiab] OR “green space”[tiab] or sprawl[tiab] OR “land use”[tiab] OR “grocery store”[tiab] OR “grocery stores”[tiab] OR proximity[tiab] OR “population density”[tiab] OR “retail density”[tiab] OR “fast food density”[tiab] OR “spatial access”[tiab] OR “recreational facilities”[tiab] OR “active transport”[tiab] OR worksite[tiab] OR worksites[tiab] OR “sports facilities”[tiab] OR “urban form”[tiab] OR “zoning”[tiab] OR “neighbourhood planning”[tiab] OR “neighborhood planning”[tiab] OR pedestrian[tiab] OR “urban design”[tiab] NOT #3: ((child[Mesh] OR adolescent[Mesh] OR youth*[tiab] OR childhood[tiab] OR adolescent*[tiab] OR infant*[tiab]) NOT adult[Mesh])
No. of original sources 92
Synthesis method qualitative
Quantitative map included no
Conflict of interest not declared specifically
Comments

 

Details about searches

Search sources
Search source name Source type Comments Weblink
Web of Sciences Online Database Web of Science is an online subscription-based scientific citation indexing service originally produced by the Institute for Scientific Information, now maintained by Clarivate Analytics, that provides a comprehensive citation search. https://apps.webofknowledge.com
Embase Online Database Embase is a highly versatile, multipurpose and up-to-date biomedical database. It covers the most important international biomedical literature from 1947 to the present day and all articles are indexed in depth using Elsevier's Life Science thesaurus Embase Indexing and Emtree®. The entire database is also conveniently available on multiple platforms. https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/embase-biomedical-research
PsycINFO Online Database PsycINFO is an expansive abstracting and indexing database with more than 3 million records devoted to peer-reviewed literature from the 1800s to the present in the behavioral sciences and mental health, making it an ideal discovery and linking tool for scholarly research. http://www.apa.org/pubs/databases/psycinfo/index.aspx
PubMed Online Database PubMed comprises more than 27 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books. Citations may include links to full-text content from PubMed Central and publisher web sites. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/
Cochrane library Online Database The Cochrane Library is a collection of high-quality, independent evidence to inform healthcare decision-making. Six databases are available including the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and a register of controlled trials. http://www.cochranelibrary.com/
Keywords used in search built environment, city planning, environment design, environmental characteristic, environmental determinant, environmental factor, environmental influence, land use mix, obesity, obesogenic environment, overweight, recreational facilities, rural environment, urban environment, weight loss

 

Authorship

Authors
Name Email Organisation Address Country
Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij Department of Movement and Sports Sciences, Ghent University Watersportlaan 2, B-9000 Ghent Belgium
Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij Department of Movement and Sport Sciences Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium Belgium
Joreintje D Mackenbach* j.mackenbach@vumc.nl The EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research Department of General Practice and Elderly Care Medicine, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands Netherlands
Harry Rutter European Centre on Health of Societies in Transition London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK United Kingdom
Sofie Compernolle Department of Movement and Sport Sciences Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium Belgium
Ketevan Glonti European Centre on Health of Societies in Transition London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK United Kingdom
Jean-Michel Oppert Universite? Paris 13 Sorbonne Paris Cite? - UREN (Unite? de Recherche en Epide?miologie Nutrition- nelle) France
Jean-Michel Oppert Universite? Pierre et Marie Curie-Paris 6, Dept of Nutrition Pitie?-Salpe?trie?re Hospital (AP-HP), (CRNH IdF), Institute of Cardiometabolism and Nutrition (ICAN), Paris, France. France
Helene Charreire Research Unit on Nutritional Epidemiology INSERM U557, Paris 13 Human Nutrition Research Center of Ile de France and Paris Est University, Lab-Urba Urban Institut of Paris, UPEC, Cre?teil, France. France
Johannes Brug 7The EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Netherlands
Giel Nijpels The EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research Department of General Practice and Elderly Care Medicine, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands Netherlands
Jeroen Lakerveld The EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research Department of General Practice and Elderly Care Medicine, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands Netherlands

 

Funding

Funding sources
Funding source Address Country Funded year Comments
European Commision Europe (Region)


Article publication information:

Article type Journal article
Article category Text
Geographical scale
Language English
Chapter or part
Conference date
Conference venue
Published date 2014-03-06
Edition
Issue 1
Journal BMC Public Health
Pagination 233
Peer reviewed yes
Publication place
Publisher BioMed Central
School / department or centre
Series volume no.
Series title
Series sort no.
Volume 14
Website owner
Copyrights of article
Licences of article Open Access:
Identifiers of article DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-233, ISBN: 1471-2458 (Electronic)\r1471-2458 (Linking), ISSN: 1471-2458, PMID: 24602291


Quality assessment

Quality measure Details Score Comments
QA question 1 Are the research questions and inclusion criteria for the review clearly delineated? 1 = “Yes” = Who (Population), What (Intervention, Comparator group, Outcome), Where and When described. general but concrete description of aims
QA question 2 Did the report of the review contain an explicit statement that the review methods were established prior to the conduct of the review and did the report justify any significant deviations from the protocol? 0 = ”No” = research question and inclusion criteria not outlined in detail. not provided
QA question 3 Did the review authors explain their selection of the study designs for inclusion in the review? 0.5 = “Can’t answer / not sure / partially” =Cannot decide between “yes” and “no”, basing on the information provided in the paper. cross-sectional or longitudinal
QA question 4 Did the review authors use a comprehensive literature search strategy? 0.5 = “Can’t answer / not sure / partially” = searched at least 2 databases (relevant to research question), provided key word and/or general search strategy, justified publication restrictions (e.g., language). 5 databases
QA question 5 Did the review authors perform study selection in duplicate? 1 = “Yes” = either ONE of the following: at least two reviewers independently agreed on selection of eligible studies and achieved consensus on which studies to include OR two reviewers selected a sample of eligible studies and achieved good agreement (at least 80%), with the remainder selected by one reviewer. 1 reviewers did main screening and second re-screened 25% of papers
QA question 6 Did the review authors perform data extraction in duplicate? 1 = “Yes” = either ONE of the following: at least two reviewers achieved consensus on which data to extract from included studies OR two reviewers extracted data from a sample of eligible studies and achieved good agreement (at least 8 %), with the remainder extracted by one reviewer. 2 reviewers participated in full-text extraction and quality assessment
QA question 7 Did the review authors provide a list of excluded studies and justify the exclusions? 0 =”No” = No list of studies excluded at a full-text stage. not provided
QA question 8 Did the review authors describe the included studies in adequate detail? 1 = “Yes” = ALL the following: Who (Population), What (Intervention, Comparator group, Outcome), Where and When described in detail. Table 1
QA question 9 Did the review authors use a satisfactory technique for assessing the risk of bias (RoB) in individual studies that were included in the review? 1 = “Yes” = specifically mentions RoB assessment of individual included studies. Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies (as developed by the EffectivePublic Health Practice Project)
QA question 10 Did the review authors report on the sources of funding for the studies included in the review? 0 =”No” = no report of the sources of funding for individual studies included in the review. not provided
QA question 11 If meta-analysis was performed did the review authors use appropriate methods for statistical combination of results? N/A no meta-analysis
QA question 12 If meta-analysis was performed, did the review authors assess the potential impact of RoB in individual studies on the results of the meta-analysis or other evidence synthesis? N/A no meta-analysis
QA question 13 Did the review authors account for RoB in individual studies when interpreting/ discussing the results of the review? 0 =”No” = no discussion of the potential impact of RoB in individual studies. not provided
QA question 14 Did the review authors provide a satisfactory explanation for, and discussion of, any heterogeneity observed in the results of the review? 1 = “Yes” = There was no significant heterogeneity in the results OR if heterogeneity was present the authors performed an investigation of sources of any heterogeneity in the results and discussed the impact of this on the results of the review. general discussion
QA question 15 If they performed quantitative synthesis did the review authors carry out an adequate investigation of publication bias (small study bias) and discuss its likely impact on the results of the review? N/A no meta-analysis
QA question 16 Did the review authors report any potential sources of conflict of interest, including any funding they received for conducting the review? 1 = “Yes” = The authors reported no competing interests OR the authors described their funding sources and how they managed potential conflicts of interest. both conflict of interests and funding statements provided
Quality index Overall rating (Quality Index) assigned to each SR, highlighting whether major concerns arose during quality assessment that may affect overall conclusions of a SR: A = Minimal flaws; B = Some flaws; C = Major flaws in many aspects of the review. B no protocol, some details missing, some bias might be present
Suggested review type Actual review type:systematic map, systematic review, rapid review, scoping review, narrative review, etc. systematic review N/A
Risk of bias level How likely are the main conclusions of the review to be biased? Basing on review type and quality index and quality_index_comment assign: high moderate or low risk? medium no protocol, some details missing, some bias might be present