We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This study examined the separate relationships between socio-economic disadvantage and the density of multiple types of food outlets, and relationships between socio-economic disadvantage and composite food environment indices.
Design:
Cross-sectional data were analysed using geospatial kernel density techniques. Food outlet data included convenience stores, discount stores, fast-food and fast casual restaurants, and grocery stores. Controlling for urbanicity and race/ethnicity, multivariate linear regression was used to examine the relationships between socio-economic disadvantage and density of food outlets.
Setting:
This study occurred in a large Southeastern US county containing 255 census block groups with a total population of 474 266, of which 77·1 % was Non-Hispanic White, the median household income was $48 886 and 15·0 % of residents lived below 125 % of the federal poverty line.
Participants:
The unit of analysis was block groups; all data about neighbourhood socio-economic disadvantage and food outlets were publicly available.
Results:
As block group socio-economic disadvantage increased, so too did access to all types of food outlets. The total food environment index, calculated as the ratio of unhealthy food outlets to all food outlets, decreased as block group disadvantage increased.
Conclusions:
Those who reside in more disadvantaged block groups have greater access to both healthy and unhealthy food outlets. The density of unhealthy establishments was greater in more disadvantaged areas; however, because of having greater access to grocery stores, disadvantaged populations have less obesogenic total food environments. Structural changes are needed to reduce access to unhealthy food outlets to ensure environmental injustice and reduce obesity risk.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.