Short-Form Audit Instrument for Assessing Corner Store Healthfulness

DeWeese, Robin S.; Todd, Michael; Karpyn, Allison; Yedidia, Michael J.; Kennedy, Michelle; Bruening, Meg; Wharton, Christopher; Ohri‐Vachaspati, Punam

doi:10.1177/0890117116679059

Cited by 10 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The study design, sampling approach, and development of a reduced corner store audit instrument have been described previously ( DeWeese et al, in press ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Healthy store programs and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), but not the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), are associated with corner store healthfulness

DeWeese

Todd

Karpyn

et al. 2016

Preventive Medicine Reports

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In response to lack of access to healthy foods, many low-income communities are instituting local healthy corner store programs. Some stores also participate in the United States Department of Agriculture's Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). This study used two assessment tools to compare the healthfulness of offerings at stores participating in local healthy store programs (upgraded stores), WIC, and/or SNAP to that of similar non-participating stores.Based on store audits conducted in 315 New Jersey corner stores in 2014, we calculated healthy food availability scores using subsections of the Nutrition Environment Measures Survey for Corner Stores (NEMS-CS-Availability) and a short-form corner store audit tool (SCAT). We used multivariable regression to examine associations between program participation and scores on both instruments.Adjusting for store and block group characteristics, stores participating in a local healthy store program had significantly higher SCAT scores than did non-participating stores (upgraded: M = 3.18, 95% CI 2.65–3.71; non-upgraded: M = 2.52, 95% CI 2.32–2.73); scores on the NEMS-CS-Availability did not differ (upgraded: M = 12.8, 95% CI 11.6–14.1; non-upgraded: M = 12.5, 95% CI 12.0–13.0). WIC-participating stores had significantly higher scores compared to non-participating stores on both tools. Stores participating in SNAP only (and not in WIC) scored significantly lower on both instruments compared to non-SNAP stores.WIC-participating and non-SNAP corner stores had higher healthfulness scores on both assessment tools. Upgraded stores had higher healthfulness scores compared to non-upgraded stores on the SCAT.

show abstract

“…The study design, sampling approach, and development of a reduced corner store audit instrument have been described previously ( DeWeese et al, in press ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The SCAT is a validated instrument (Pearson correlation of 0.79 between SCAT and NEMS-CS availability scores), developed using the NEMS-CS-Availability tool and store audits ( DeWeese et al, in press ). It requires fewer resources compared to comprehensive store audit tools to capture corner stores' healthfulness levels.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Healthy store programs and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), but not the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), are associated with corner store healthfulness

DeWeese

Todd

Karpyn

et al. 2016

Preventive Medicine Reports

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Availability of healthful alternatives is more heavily represented in the short-form with inflated scores for these dimensions observed in the current study, at the expense or complete absence of other dimensions, namely quality, placement, information, promotion, facilitators, barriers, and price. Other efforts to develop short-form measures of outlet healthfulness have also focussed only on availability of foods (45) , thereby removing the ability to assess other aspects of the food environment known to affect consumer purchase and consumption of foods.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Social marketing theory development goals: an agenda to drive change

Rundle‐Thiele

David

Willmott

et al. 2019

Journal of Marketing Management

105

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research was conducted under a collaborative research agreement between Griffith University and the Defence Science and Technology Group (DST Group). The authors would like to acknowledge DST Group for providing financial support for this study (via a student scholarship). Conflict of Interest: None. Authorship: JC led the study design and execution; analysis and interpretation; and authoring of the manuscript. SR-T contributed to study design; interpretation; and authorship of the manuscript. RS contributed to study design and execution; analysis; and critical reviewing of the final manuscript. Ethics of human subject participation: The study protocol was considered by the GU Ethics Committee and assessed as not requiring formal ethical review.

show abstract

“…6 Details of that study are provided elsewhere. 6 Briefly, it was part of the New Jersey Child Health Study, and the sample of 325 New Jersey corner stores was powered for that project.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6 Details of that study are provided elsewhere. 6 Briefly, it was part of the New Jersey Child Health Study, and the sample of 325 New Jersey corner stores was powered for that project. The sampling frame consisted of small food stores listed in 2013 commercially available business lists (InfoUSA and Nielsen) for the metro areas of Camden, Newark, New Brunswick, and Trenton, NJ.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost of Children's Healthy vs Unhealthy Snacks Does Not Differ at Convenience Stores

DeWeese

Ohri‐Vachaspati

2017

Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective This study compared the prices of unhealthy (chips) and healthy (ready-to-eat fruit) snacks that students are likely to purchase from corner stores. Methods Snacks were purchased from 325 New Jersey corner stores; chip prices were compared to fruit prices overall and by store sales volume and block group characteristics. Results Prices did not differ significantly between chips and fruit in the overall sample in which both items were available (n=104) (chips: $0.46±$0.15; fruit: $0.49±$0.19; p=0.48), or by store or block group characteristics. Neither mean fruit prices nor mean chip prices differed by store sales volume or by neighborhood characteristics. Conclusions and Implications Promoting ready-to-eat fruits in corner stores to children as a price-neutral alternative to calorically dense snacks can be a viable strategy to improve the nutritional quality of snacks commonly purchased at corner stores.

show abstract

Short-Form Audit Instrument for Assessing Corner Store Healthfulness

Abstract: The SCAT discriminates between higher versus lower healthfulness scores of corner stores and is feasible for use as a phone audit tool.

Cited by 10 publications

References 22 publications

Healthy store programs and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), but not the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), are associated with corner store healthfulness

Healthy store programs and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), but not the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), are associated with corner store healthfulness

Social marketing theory development goals: an agenda to drive change

Cost of Children's Healthy vs Unhealthy Snacks Does Not Differ at Convenience Stores

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About