Literature DB >> 25716535

Should support for obesity interventions or perceptions of their perceived effectiveness shape policy?

Philip Gendall1, Janet Hoek, Rachael Taylor, Jim Mann, Jeremy Krebs, Amber Parry-Strong.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Most studies suggest the public locate responsibility for the 'obesity epidemic' with individuals themselves and support measures promoting greater personal responsibility in the belief these will reduce obesity prevalence. We compared estimates of policy support with estimates of perceived policy effectiveness to test this assumption.
METHODS: In an on-line survey of 534 New Zealanders, we tested support for 15 potential measures to reduce overweight and obesity and compared this with estimates of the effectiveness of these policies, determined by a Best-Worst choice experiment.
RESULTS: Respondents gave strongest support to measures encouraging people to undertake more exercise and adopt a better diet. However, they saw greater personal responsibility as less effective in reducing obesity than environmental interventions that reduced the costs of healthy food and exercise, and decreased the availability of unhealthy foods.
CONCLUSIONS: Potentially important differences exist between the measures the general public say they support to address obesity, which favour personal responsibility and education, and those they believe will be effective, which include more environmental interventions. IMPLICATIONS: Simply measuring the popularity of measures to reduce obesity produces an incomplete picture of public opinion. Examining the perceived efficacy of different interventions offers a complementary perspective that policy makers should also consider.
© 2015 Public Health Association of Australia.

Entities:  

Keywords:  attitudes; best-worst; obesity; public policy

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25716535     DOI: 10.1111/1753-6405.12319

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Aust N Z J Public Health        ISSN: 1326-0200            Impact factor:   2.939


  6 in total

Review 1.  The development of scientific evidence for health policies for obesity: why and how?

Authors:  M B Richardson; M S Williams; K R Fontaine; D B Allison
Journal:  Int J Obes (Lond)       Date:  2017-03-15       Impact factor: 5.095

2.  Social acceptability of standard and behavioral economic inspired policies designed to reduce and prevent obesity.

Authors:  Emily Lancsar; Jemimah Ride; Nicole Black; Leonie Burgess; Anna Peeters
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2021-10-29       Impact factor: 2.395

Review 3.  Using Best-Worst Scaling to Investigate Preferences in Health Care.

Authors:  Kei Long Cheung; Ben F M Wijnen; Ilene L Hollin; Ellen M Janssen; John F Bridges; Silvia M A A Evers; Mickael Hiligsmann
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Ensuring the right to food for indigenous children: a case study of stakeholder perspectives on policy options to ensure the rights of tamariki Māori to healthy food.

Authors:  Christina McKerchar; Cameron Lacey; Gillian Abel; Louise Signal
Journal:  Int J Equity Health       Date:  2021-02-27

5.  Competing public narratives in nutrition policy: insights into the ideational barriers of public support for regulatory nutrition measures.

Authors:  Katherine Cullerton; Dori Patay; Michael Waller; Eloise Adsett; Amanda Lee
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2022-08-09

6.  Assessing the social climate of physical (in)activity in Canada.

Authors:  Lira Yun; Leigh Vanderloo; Tanya R Berry; Amy E Latimer-Cheung; Norman O'Reilly; Ryan E Rhodes; John C Spence; Mark S Tremblay; Guy Faulkner
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2018-11-27       Impact factor: 3.295

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.