The availability of snack food displays that may trigger impulse purchases in Melbourne supermarkets

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Supermarkets play a major role in influencing the food purchasing behaviours of most households. Snack food exposures within these stores may contribute to higher levels of consumption and ultimately to increasing levels of obesity, particularly within socioeconomically disadvantaged neighbourhoods. We aimed to examine the availability of snack food displays at checkouts, end-of-aisle displays and island displays in major supermarket chains in the least and most socioeconomically disadvantaged neighbourhoods of Melbourne.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Within-store audits of 35 Melbourne supermarkets. Supermarkets were sampled from the least and most socioeconomically disadvantaged suburbs within 30 km of the Melbourne CBD. We measured the availability of crisps, chocolate, confectionery, and soft drinks (diet and regular) at the checkouts, in end-of-aisle displays, and in island bin displays.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Snack food displays were most prominent at checkouts with only five stores not having snack foods at 100% of their checkouts. Snack foods were also present at a number of end-of-aisle displays (at both the front (median 38%) and back (median 33%) of store), and in island bin displays (median number of island displays: 7; median total circumference of island displays: 19.4 metres). Chocolate items were the most common snack food item on display. There was no difference in the availability of these snack food displays by neighbourhood disadvantage.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>As a result of the high availability of snack food displays, exposure to snack foods is almost unavoidable in Melbourne supermarkets, regardless of levels of neighbourhood socioeconomic disadvantage. Results of this study could promote awareness of the prominence of unhealthy food items in chain-brand supermarkets outlets.</p

Essential competencies in prescribing : A first european cross-sectional study among 895 final-year medical students

European medical students should have acquired adequate prescribing competencies before graduation, but it is not known whether this is the case. In this international multicenter study, we evaluated the essential knowledge, skills, and attitudes in clinical pharmacology and therapeutics (CPT) of final-year medical students across Europe. In a cross-sectional design, 26 medical schools from 17 European countries were asked to administer a standardized assessment and questionnaire to 50 final-year students. Although there were differences between schools, our results show an overall lack of essential prescribing competencies among final-year students in Europe. Students had a poor knowledge of drug interactions and contraindications, and chose inappropriate therapies for common diseases or made prescribing errors. Our results suggest that undergraduate teaching in CPT is inadequate in many European schools, leading to incompetent prescribers and potentially unsafe patient care. A European core curriculum with clear learning outcomes and assessments should be urgently developed

Key Learning Outcomes for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics Education in Europe: A Modified Delphi Study.

Harmonizing clinical pharmacology and therapeutics (CPT) education in Europe is necessary to ensure that the prescribing competency of future doctors is of a uniform high standard. As there are currently no uniform requirements, our aim was to achieve consensus on key learning outcomes for undergraduate CPT education in Europe. We used a modified Delphi method consisting of three questionnaire rounds and a panel meeting. A total of 129 experts from 27 European countries were asked to rate 307 learning outcomes. In all, 92 experts (71%) completed all three questionnaire rounds, and 33 experts (26%) attended the meeting. 232 learning outcomes from the original list, 15 newly suggested and 5 rephrased outcomes were included. These 252 learning outcomes should be included in undergraduate CPT curricula to ensure that European graduates are able to prescribe safely and effectively. We provide a blueprint of a European core curriculum describing when and how the learning outcomes might be acquired

Ambiguity of 'snack' in British usage

Research into least fattening eating patterns indicates that in England 'a snack' is a term that refers to different eating habits from 'snacking' and that neither pattern of behaviour necessarily involves 'snack food'. These hypotheses were tested by randomised mailings to a convenience sample of university campus addressees with the subject heading of the message and the topic of questions in it being one of the terms, a snack, snacking or snack food. Responses to all three terms much more often referred to eating between mealtimes than eating at mealtimes but this contrast was less for a snack, especially at lunchtime. Previous and subsequent eating occasions therefore tended to be at mealtimes, but again less so for a snack. A snack also differed from snacking or eating snack food in eliciting more reports by women of eating in the home than out, and more eating alone than in company. However, reports by men contributed most to differences between snack terms in the foods reported: more men ate bread in a snack than when snacking but more ate sweet items when snacking than in a snack. More men reported savoury items (e.g. potato crisps) as snack food than in response to the other two terms; however, when savouries were combined with bread-containing items, the women were unlike the men in that more of them referred to such items when snacking. Thus, for these people in England, having a snack is not the same thing as snacking or eating snack food. Because of these ambiguities in use of the root word snack, it may be best to avoid all its derivatives in questions to research participants, discussion among investigators and educational messages