Making the most of existing research: an evidence gap map of the effects of food systems interventions in low-income and middle-income countries
Objective Identify and describe the available evidence on the effects food systems interventions on food security and nutrition outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries.Methods An adapted version of the high-level panel of experts food systems framework defined the interventions and outcom...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022-06-01
|
| Series: | BMJ Open |
| Online Access: | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/12/6/e055062.full |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832583784657059840 |
|---|---|
| author | Birte Snilstveit Ingunn Gilje Storhaug Charlotte Lane Nick Moore Mark Engelbert Thalia Morrow Sparling Amber Franich Heike Rolker |
| author_facet | Birte Snilstveit Ingunn Gilje Storhaug Charlotte Lane Nick Moore Mark Engelbert Thalia Morrow Sparling Amber Franich Heike Rolker |
| author_sort | Birte Snilstveit |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Objective Identify and describe the available evidence on the effects food systems interventions on food security and nutrition outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries.Methods An adapted version of the high-level panel of experts food systems framework defined the interventions and outcomes included studies. Included study designs were experimental and quasi-experimental quantitative impact evaluations and systematic reviews. Following standards for evidence gap maps developed by 3ie, a systematic search of 17 academic databases and 31 sector-specific repositories in May 2020 identified articles for inclusion. Trained consultants screened titles/abstracts, then full texts of identified articles. Studies meeting eligibility criteria had meta-data systematically extracted and were descriptively analysed. Systematic reviews were critically appraised.Results The map includes 1838 impact evaluations and 178 systematic reviews. The most common interventions, with over 100 impact evaluations and 20 systematic reviews each, were: provision of supplements, fortification, nutrition classes, direct provision of foods and peer support/counselling. Few studies addressed national-level interventions or women’s empowerment. The most common final outcomes were: anthropometry, micronutrient status, and diet quality and adequacy. Intermediate outcomes were less studied.Most evaluations were conducted in sub-Saharan Africa (33%) or South Asia (20%). Many studies occurred in lower-middle-income countries (43%); few (7%) were in fragile countries. Among studies in a specific age group, infants were most frequently included (19%); 14% of these also considered mothers.Few evaluations considered qualitative or cost analysis; 75% used randomisation as the main identification strategy.Discussion The uneven distribution of research means that some interventions have established impacts while other interventions, often affecting large populations, are underevaluated. Areas for future research include the evaluation of national level policies, evaluation of efforts to support women’s empowerment within the food system, and the synthesis of dietary quality. Quasi-experimental approaches should be adopted to evaluate difficult to randomise interventions. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-641e109af8ff4b14ac256a6df4a518aa |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2044-6055 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2022-06-01 |
| publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMJ Open |
| spelling | doaj-art-641e109af8ff4b14ac256a6df4a518aa2025-01-28T05:55:08ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Open2044-60552022-06-0112610.1136/bmjopen-2021-055062Making the most of existing research: an evidence gap map of the effects of food systems interventions in low-income and middle-income countriesBirte Snilstveit0Ingunn Gilje Storhaug1Charlotte Lane2Nick Moore3Mark Engelbert4Thalia Morrow Sparling5Amber Franich6Heike Rolker7International Initiative for Impact Evaluation, London, UKInternational Initiative for Impact Evaluation, London, UKInternational Initiative for Impact Evaluation, Washington, District of Columbia, USAInternational Initiative for Impact Evaluation, London, UKInternational Initiative for Impact Evaluation, London, UKInnovative Methods and Metrics for Agriculture and Nutrition Actions (IMMANA), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London, UKInternational Initiative for Impact Evaluation, London, UKInnovative Methods and Metrics for Agriculture and Nutrition Actions (IMMANA), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London, UKObjective Identify and describe the available evidence on the effects food systems interventions on food security and nutrition outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries.Methods An adapted version of the high-level panel of experts food systems framework defined the interventions and outcomes included studies. Included study designs were experimental and quasi-experimental quantitative impact evaluations and systematic reviews. Following standards for evidence gap maps developed by 3ie, a systematic search of 17 academic databases and 31 sector-specific repositories in May 2020 identified articles for inclusion. Trained consultants screened titles/abstracts, then full texts of identified articles. Studies meeting eligibility criteria had meta-data systematically extracted and were descriptively analysed. Systematic reviews were critically appraised.Results The map includes 1838 impact evaluations and 178 systematic reviews. The most common interventions, with over 100 impact evaluations and 20 systematic reviews each, were: provision of supplements, fortification, nutrition classes, direct provision of foods and peer support/counselling. Few studies addressed national-level interventions or women’s empowerment. The most common final outcomes were: anthropometry, micronutrient status, and diet quality and adequacy. Intermediate outcomes were less studied.Most evaluations were conducted in sub-Saharan Africa (33%) or South Asia (20%). Many studies occurred in lower-middle-income countries (43%); few (7%) were in fragile countries. Among studies in a specific age group, infants were most frequently included (19%); 14% of these also considered mothers.Few evaluations considered qualitative or cost analysis; 75% used randomisation as the main identification strategy.Discussion The uneven distribution of research means that some interventions have established impacts while other interventions, often affecting large populations, are underevaluated. Areas for future research include the evaluation of national level policies, evaluation of efforts to support women’s empowerment within the food system, and the synthesis of dietary quality. Quasi-experimental approaches should be adopted to evaluate difficult to randomise interventions.https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/12/6/e055062.full |
| spellingShingle | Birte Snilstveit Ingunn Gilje Storhaug Charlotte Lane Nick Moore Mark Engelbert Thalia Morrow Sparling Amber Franich Heike Rolker Making the most of existing research: an evidence gap map of the effects of food systems interventions in low-income and middle-income countries BMJ Open |
| title | Making the most of existing research: an evidence gap map of the effects of food systems interventions in low-income and middle-income countries |
| title_full | Making the most of existing research: an evidence gap map of the effects of food systems interventions in low-income and middle-income countries |
| title_fullStr | Making the most of existing research: an evidence gap map of the effects of food systems interventions in low-income and middle-income countries |
| title_full_unstemmed | Making the most of existing research: an evidence gap map of the effects of food systems interventions in low-income and middle-income countries |
| title_short | Making the most of existing research: an evidence gap map of the effects of food systems interventions in low-income and middle-income countries |
| title_sort | making the most of existing research an evidence gap map of the effects of food systems interventions in low income and middle income countries |
| url | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/12/6/e055062.full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT birtesnilstveit makingthemostofexistingresearchanevidencegapmapoftheeffectsoffoodsystemsinterventionsinlowincomeandmiddleincomecountries AT ingunngiljestorhaug makingthemostofexistingresearchanevidencegapmapoftheeffectsoffoodsystemsinterventionsinlowincomeandmiddleincomecountries AT charlottelane makingthemostofexistingresearchanevidencegapmapoftheeffectsoffoodsystemsinterventionsinlowincomeandmiddleincomecountries AT nickmoore makingthemostofexistingresearchanevidencegapmapoftheeffectsoffoodsystemsinterventionsinlowincomeandmiddleincomecountries AT markengelbert makingthemostofexistingresearchanevidencegapmapoftheeffectsoffoodsystemsinterventionsinlowincomeandmiddleincomecountries AT thaliamorrowsparling makingthemostofexistingresearchanevidencegapmapoftheeffectsoffoodsystemsinterventionsinlowincomeandmiddleincomecountries AT amberfranich makingthemostofexistingresearchanevidencegapmapoftheeffectsoffoodsystemsinterventionsinlowincomeandmiddleincomecountries AT heikerolker makingthemostofexistingresearchanevidencegapmapoftheeffectsoffoodsystemsinterventionsinlowincomeandmiddleincomecountries |