Health promotion initiatives for obesity

Utilitiesjournals in ncbi databasesmesh databasencbi handbookncbi help manualncbi news & blogpubmedpubmed central (pmc)pubmed clinical queriespubmed healthall literature resources... Epub 2017 mar outcomes of health-promoting communities: being active eating well initiative-a community-based obesity prevention intervention in victoria, ka1, kremer p2,3, gibbs l4, waters e4, swinburn b1,5, de silva a6, information1global obesity centre, centre for population health research, deakin university, geelong, vic, australia. Brockhoff child health and wellbeing program, centre for health equity, melbourne school of population and global health, the university of melbourne, carlton, vic, australia. Dental school, the university of melbourne, carlton, vic, ctobjective: the aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of the health-promoting communities: being active eating well (hpc:baew, 2007-2010) initiative, which comprised community-based multi-component interventions adapted to community context in five separate communities. The intervention aimed to promote healthy eating, physical activity and stronger, healthier s: a mixed method and multilevel quasi-experimental evaluation of the hpc:baew initiative captured process, impact and outcome data. Anthropometry, obesity-related behavioural and environmental data, information regarding community context and implementation factors were collected. Relative to the comparison group, one community achieved a lower prevalence of overweight/obesity, lower weight, waist circumference and bmi (p<0. One community achieved a higher level of healthy eating policy implementation in schools; two communities achieved improved healthy eating-related behaviours (p<0. Future health promotion should consider a systems approach whereby existing systems are modified rather than relying heavily on the addition of new activities, with longer time frames for : 28321132 doi: 10. Commentshow to join pubmed commonshow to cite this comment:Ncbi > literature > directly to directly to a to z directly to directly to page directly to site receive email updates about this page, enter your email address:Micronutrient and local gies to prevent end on and local programs community efforts healthy living related is no single or simple solution to the obesity epidemic. Policy makers, state and local organizations, business and community leaders, school, childcare and healthcare professionals, and individuals must work together to create an environment that supports a healthy lifestyle. There are several ways state and local organizations can create a supportive environment to promote healthy living behaviors that prevent and local ces are available to help disseminate consistent public health recommendations and evidence-based practices for state, local, territorial and tribal public health organizations, grantees, and g your body mass index (bmi), achieving and maintaining a healthy weight, and getting regular physical activity are all actions you can take for yourself to combat reverse the obesity epidemic, community efforts should focus on supporting healthy eating and active living in a variety of settings. Learn about different efforts that can be used key to achieving and maintaining a healthy weight isn't short-term dietary changes; it's about a lifestyle that includes healthy eating and regular physical ing your and waist circumference are two screening tools to estimate weight status and potential disease risk. Visit the healthy weight website; learn about balancing calories, losing weight, and maintaining a healthy y eating habits are a key factor for a healthy weight. Visit the choosemyplate website; look up nutritional information of foods, track your calorie intake, plan meals, and find healthy al activity al activity is important for health and a healthy weight. Learn about different kinds of physical activity and the guidelines for the amount needed each about the seriousness of childhood obesity and how to help your child establish healthy ion, physical activity and obesity prevention strategies and guidelines provides guidance for program managers, policy makers, and others on how to select receive email updates about this page, enter your email address:Micronutrient and local formats help:how do i view different file formats (pdf, doc, ppt, mpeg) on this site?

Health promotion plan for obesity

Powerpoint last reviewed: october 27, last updated: october 27, on of nutrition, physical activity, and obesity, national center for chronic disease prevention and health g you find government information and formation and serviceshealthhealth government information about health promotions and initiatives to help with a healthy lifestyle. Healthy and active ad for: a healthy and active es a range of information and initiatives on healthy eating, regular physical activity and overweight and obesity to assist all australians to lead healthy and active ad for: cancer es supporting information for campaigns to protect your health through early detection, even if you don’t have any symptoms of the disease. Along with a range of initiatives, it aims to reduce harms associated with drinking to intoxication by young flu campaign ad for: fight flu campaign al health and medical research council page with links to download resources, including multi-language flyers, related to the fight flu al health and medical research ad for: health star es supporting information for a campaign about the health star ratings on packaged food. Learn how they can help you make healthier ad for: health weight es supporting information for a campaign to help you to achieve and maintain a healthy weight using information and tools ad for: healthy ed for both employers and employees and includes a range of information and resources to assist with making workplaces ad for: l smoking quit tips, tracking systems to chart your progress, daily motivational messages and reminders for those planning to start the quitting lian national preventive health and tissue ad for: organ and tissue ages people to register their decision about becoming an organ and/or tissue donor and to discuss their decision with family and friends. Discover the facts about organ and tissue and tissue ad for: pelvic floor ages pelvic floor safe exercises so that people don't experience unwanted side effects such as bladder and bowel ence foundation of ad for: ised workouts allow people of all fitness levels and pelvic floor function to undertake pelvic floor safe exercises to reduce the risk of bladder and bowel ence foundation of ncy pelvic floor ad for: s you how to exercise your pelvic floor muscles to maintain or improve bladder control and also provides practical information and tips on bladder and bowel ence foundation of for you – quit for ad for: es support and encouragement to help you give up smoking if you are pregnant or planning to lian national preventive health w – national tobacco ad for: quitnow – national tobacco es supporting information for the quitnow national tobacco campaign, providing smokers with motivation and support to help them stop – sexually transmissible ad for: sti – sexually transmissible es supporting information for a campaign to prevent catching, or spreading, an sti. Randomised trial of a school-community child health promotion and obesity prevention intervention: findings from the evaluation of fun ‘n healthy in moreland! To this article has been published in bmc public health 2017 17: peer review -level, longer-term obesity prevention interventions that focus on inequalities are scarce. Aimed to improve child adiposity, school policies and environments, parent engagement, health behaviours and child children from primary schools in an inner urban, culturally diverse and economically disadvantaged area in victoria, australia were eligible for participation. Used a health promoting schools framework and provided schools with evidence, school research data and part time support from a community development worker to develop health promoting strategies. Intervention did not result in statistically significant differences in bmi z score across trial arms but did result in greater policy implementation, increased parent engagement and resources, improved child self-rated health, increased fruit, vegetable and water consumption, and reduction in sweet drinks. Obesity preventionschoolscluster oundchildhood obesity is associated with a wide range of adverse psychosocial and physical health outcomes. Development of effective intervention approaches to prevent childhood obesity continues to be a public health priority [1]. Interventions to promote health among young people have commonly been delivered via schools [3], in large part due to their potential to reach large numbers of children simultaneously. Much of the school-based obesity prevention interventions have centred around the provision of education, aimed at enhancing factors such as young people’s knowledge, attitudes and self efficacy [2]. However, given the complex aetiology of childhood obesity, interventions solely targeting these individual and intrapersonal factors are likely to have limited effects. Hence, schools provide opportunities to go beyond providing young people with education, to provide and influence contexts which are supportive of positive health and wellbeing, consistent with ottawa charter principles [4].

Whilst schools are limited in the extent to which they can influence the wider impact of industry and commerce, they do provide a setting within which multi-level interventionist approaches can be developed and tested to reduce unhealthy weight gain [5]. A cochrane review of multi-level school interventions based on the who health promoting schools framework (hpsf) provided evidence that interventions which combine curriculum change with environmental change and engagement with parents and community can have small but significant effects on outcomes such as bmi, as well as physical activity and dietary behaviours [6]. 1–48]there are significant gaps in the evidence base for child obesity prevention interventions which: target changes in the environmental context and policies; operate in geographic areas or populations where the burden is greatest; as well as interventions or programs which are implemented beyond one year [2]. Engaging parents and communities has proved more difficult to achieve than incremental school changes such as increased focus on health topics within the curriculum [7–9]. Furthermore, studies which imbed harm prevention within the context of obesity prevention are needed to ensure that school-based obesity prevention strategies have positive outcomes and do not increase body dissatisfaction or weight related impacts on mental health [2, 10]. 9] demonstrate the relevance of complex systems in the development and evaluation of health promoting school interventions. Emerged from a shared interest between a university research group and a local community health service with the aim of making a difference to the adverse health outcomes experienced through child disadvantage in an inner city area of melbourne, australia. In this particular community context, the population was characterised by a socioeconomically and culturally diverse population, and relative socioeconomic disadvantage associated with a significantly higher prevalence of overweight and obesity (31%) [16]. Developed with a focus on the need for a complex intervention and a rigorous mixed method study design, to meet the needs of local and state-wide public health decision-makers, and to ensure that the approach and methods were suitable and inclusive within such a diverse and disadvantaged ‘n healthy in moreland! Was an evidence-based, multi-level, child health promotion and obesity prevention program evaluated using a cluster randomised controlled trial study design. The project addressed the issue of child overweight and obesity by working closely with school communities to develop integrated, multi-level interventions guided by the limited evidence available in 2005. In contrast to many previous school-based obesity prevention projects, an extensive research component was incorporated to evaluate the physical, environmental, social, behavioural and financial impacts and outcomes of the city of moreland, a local government municipality (population of 135,205 in 2006) is located 8. Was funded by three departments of the state government (sport and recreation, health, and education). Intervention staff (community development workers) were employed by merri community health services1 and research and evaluation staff were employed by deakin university (2004–7) – relocating to university of melbourne (2007–9). This model ensured that merri community health services had influence and leadership on the design and implementation of the intervention, in partnership with the schools, maximising the chance of high impact and sustainability. The implementation of the trial and evaluation study was governed by a project team comprising both researchers and merri community health staff who consulted regularly with school staff, families and community leaders.

Additional advice was provided by an internal merri community health services staff advisory committee during the development of the study, and an external committee of government stakeholders which met tical design and implementation of the intervention was underpinned by the who health promoting schools framework, an evidence informed decision making process, and the international obesity task force ‘10 guiding principles for obesity prevention’, which state that health promotion initiatives be empowering, participatory, holistic, inter-sectoral, equitable, sustainable and multi-strategy. The health promoting schools framework (hpsf) is based on health promotion theory and is consistent with a socio-environmental theoretical framework [20]. Hpsf has been widely used and developed to assist schools to address health issues over the past decade [6, 21]. The advantage of the hpsf is that it is designed to guide multilevel interventions to account for environmental, sociocultural and individual influences on health behaviours. Were supported to develop fun ‘n healthy programs according to the fixed requirement of a whole school combined focus on increasing fruit, vegetable and water consumption, increasing physical activity and encouraging positive self-esteem in children. This support ensured that the strategies followed health promotion principles in creating a supportive and sustainable environment, customised for the school community to achieve changes in relation to the school system, policy, curriculum, environment, and child behavior and health outcomes. The cdws were in turn supported by the research program manager (lgi) to enable shared problem solving and links with evidence-informed aims of the intervention were to: overweight and obesity and improve child health and e child and family dietary intake, increase child and family physical activity and reduce child sedentary e knowledge and skills of school staff, family and children regarding sustainable strategies for healthy eating, physical activity and environmental p sustainable positive changes in school, home and community environments (system integration, policies, physical, social, and community connections). Contextual and programmatic features of the intervention that impact on ically, the logic of the approach was underpinned by a hypothesis that changes in the school environment in terms of policies, programs, curriculum, physical environment and parent engagement would result in changed parent and child knowledge and behaviours, and with sufficient time lead to improvements in health and wellbeing and weight status of selection and s were eligible to participate in the study if they were located in the moreland municipality and exclusively covered the primary (elementary) school-aged group, aged 4–13 years (n = 36 schools). All children attending the consenting schools and their parent/guardian were invited to ing recruitment and baseline data collection, schools were randomised using computer-generated random numbers to either actively engage with the fun ‘n healthy in moreland! Program (intervention arm) or continue with normal school activities and programs for healthy eating and physical activity (comparison arm). Intervention schools were provided with a memorandum of understanding which clearly articulated the parameters of the intervention and the respective rights and responsibilities of each participating organisation (school, community health service and university). Focus groups to explore children’s concepts of health and strategies to promote health in the home and school s on the school, home and community environments were measured by:School reported audit of the school food and physical activity environment, including physical activity facilities, canteen and fundraising policies and practices [33]. Exit interviews to identify barriers and enablers to the school experience and likelihood of r-reported school- and class-based nutrition and physical activity initiatives and level of ational measure. This paper will present results from the anthropometric measures, school questionnaire, principal interviews, parent questionnaire, child questionnaire and lunchbox survey collected at baseline and e of study measures child anthropometry:weight✓✗✓height✓✗✓child waist circumference✗✗✓ child questionnairechild pa levels✓✗✓dietary and pa knowledge and attitudes✓✗✓health and wellbeing✓✗✓ lunchbox auditdietary intake✓✗✓ food recorddietary intake✓✗✗ child focus groupchild perceptions of health and aspects of school programs/environment✓✗✗parent measures parent questionnaireparent knowledge and attitudes about food and pa✓✗✓home food and pa environment✓✗✓indication of the cost and time impacts of food and pa✓✗✓child and parent’s eating and pa behaviours✓✗✓socio-demographics✓✗✓school measures so playindication of activity levels in the playground✓✓✓ photos of play areasplay equipment in the school grounds✓✓✓ teacher questionnairestaff knowledge of healthy eating and pa guidelines✓✗✓ school questionnaireprofile of school food & pa environment✓✓✓ staff focus groupschool information including previous activities or school culture✓✗✗ resource assessmentassessment of level of investment in interventions in terms of money spent, staff and volunteer time✗✓✓ independent capacityassessment of school capacity to implement sustainable changes independently✗✓✓ kids go for your life criteriaassessment of school achievement of state government key health promotion program areas✗✓✓ intervention monitoring toolmapping and monitoring of school intervention implementation✗✓✓ principal interviewperceptions of the usefulness, acceptability, efficiency of the interventions, changes in the school and external environment✗✗✓. For dichotomous outcomes such as prevalence of overweight/obesity, marginal logistic regression models were fitted using generalized estimating equations with information sandwich (“robust”) estimates of standard error, specifying an exchangeable correlation structure. At baseline there were no observed differences between trial arms in the proportion of children with overseas-born mothers, but the intervention arm had higher levels of maternal education, smaller family size, and fewer possessing a health care card.

4 5+ children, %yment status combined maternal and paternal – at least one in part time, at least one in part time or both unemployed/home and others measures of intervention had no significant effect on prevalence of overweight and obesity. A reduction in the proportion of overweight/obesity was seen across the whole sample between baseline2 and follow up. No intervention effect was observed for mean weight (kg), bmi, waist circumference or proportion of overweight and/or obesity at follow up, after adjusting for age, sex, sep and sted and adjusted mean (sd) or proportion adiposity values (who cut-offs) and intervention effect post intervention (2009). 010 child general health vgood/ted for school mean score at ted for school mean score at baseline, age, sex, sep(maternal education, seifa), ethnicity(only english spoken at home). Was no intervention effect on self-reported levels of physical and sedentary l health and ce of an intervention effect was found for the self-reported general health status item but not for mean index scores for child wellbeing (table 4). No intervention effect on adiposity, and intervention effect on healthy eating at nmental ity development worker records showed that many of the schools chose similar intervention strategies (see table 5). Additional details on school capacity and implementation of intervention strategies will be reported ention strategies implemented in 4 or more al activitychanged playgroundnew sports equipmentclass/school exercise sessionsafter school sports classactive transport policy – bike sheds/rackspe teacherride/walk to schoolsoccer club clinicshealthy eatinghealthy lunch options (developed with children, parents &/or supplier)healthy snacksfruit breaksupgraded tapsschool water policy & water bottlesschool healthy eating policyschool breakfastapple slinky machinesfruit deliveriescooking gardensparent nutrition information and educationhealth promotionteacher professional developmentspecial eventsnewsletter itemshealthy fundraisingcurriculum changeswellbeingbullying/wellbeing policiesbody image trainingwellbeing programswellbeing officer/counsellorwellbeing focussed principals were originally asked to report on whether their school had written policies relating to physical activity and the canteen. As part of the intervention process, many of the schools chose to expand their canteen policy to include a broader school-wide healthy eating policy to include strategies such as healthy fundraising, drink water policies and replacement of confectionary as in-class rewards. A question about a school-wide healthy eating policy was subsequently added to the follow up questionnaire. Intervention schools at follow up were more likely to report have a school-wide healthy eating policy (9/12) compared with comparison schools (2/10), whereas comparison schools were more likely to report having a written canteen policy (6/10) compared with intervention schools (3/12). Of those schools that did have written policies, none of nine comparison schools ‘strongly agreed’ that either the physical activity policies or the healthy eating policies were widely or consistently implemented, whereas five of eleven intervention schools with written physical activity policies and five of nine intervention schools with written school-wide healthy eating policies ‘strongly agreed’ that policies were widely or consistently tion of schools with written policies at baseline and follow al activity 8 (66. Not collected at principals reported on whether the school followed specific student, parent and staff focussed initiatives or practices regarding physical activity and healthy eating. Intervention schools reported a greater interaction between the school and parents in terms of physical activity and healthy eating initiatives compared with comparison schools, most evident in initiatives related to the school-parent interface (table 7). Intervention parents and children also reported being more aware of school-parent initiatives, compared to those in comparison practices post intervention (2009) (assessed for completing schools). Support for physical education/sport excellent12/12 (100%)3/9 (33%) sufficient resources/information on what to do11/12 (92%)4/9 (44%) implementing state government program and resources (physical activity)11/12 (92%)6/9 (67%)healthy eating practices (only schools which completed the questionnaire included). School time for fruit and vegetable consumption11/12 (92%)7/9 (78%) promotion of fruit & vegetables in lunchbox8/12 (67%)6/9 (67%) ‘nude’ food days8/12 (67%)4/9 (44%) drink bottles in class with water only11/12 (92%)9/9 (100%).

Information on inclusion of fruit/veg in lunchbox10/12 (83%)2/9 (22%) regular information on school strategies for healthy eating12/12 (100%)3/9 (33%) regular general information on healthy eating11/12 (92%)3/9 (33%) parent nutrition education seminars6/12 (50%)2/9 (22%). Support from parents4/5 (80%)3/5 (60%) sufficient resources/information on what to do (healthy eating4/5 (80%)3/5(60%) implementing state government program and resources (healthy eating)8/12 (67%)1/9 (11%). There was no associated increase in parent-reported costs to pal exit l, principals across all intervention schools reported that the intervention model trialled in fun ‘n healthy in moreland! The principals were confident that the changes introduced as part of the fun ‘n healthy in moreland! For example, one school started a new year by completely removing all of the canteen items and replacing them with only three healthy lunch options. Years of the intervention a generational shift had occurred and for the majority of the school community the changes were actually the norm and resistance was the principals’ perspective, the impact of the fun ‘n healthy strategies and evaluation processes on student body image were low, and self-esteem was not described as a concern as it was addressed through school-wide programs. Children were described in many schools as having an important role in introducing changes such as new canteen menu options and healthy fundraising options to the broader school community. For example, one school worked with their local café lunch supplier to replace the traditional canteen lunch options with healthy home cooked options such as zucchini slice. In another school, car-pooling was introduced to support child participation in out-of-school sport unanticipated outcome described by some of the program principals was the fact that following the changes there was less need for discipline and there were very positive relationships between staff and students arising from the teacher involvement in the physical activities introduced by the school as part of the sionthis study assessed the effectiveness of a low investment, child health promotion and obesity prevention intervention, fun ‘n healthy in moreland! That aimed to improve school environments, policy development and implementation, parent engagement, health behaviours, child wellbeing and adiposity. It addressed a gap in the evidence by targeting an inner urban, culturally diverse and low socioeconomic area where children were at greatest risk of overweight and icant reductions in overweight and obesity were observed over time at all schools, but there was no statistically significant difference in mean bmi between trial arms at follow-up in 2009. A null effect for bmi has been shown in other large studies [2], including the very large texas fitness now program [38] and the healthy study [39]. Inchley and colleagues in their process evaluation of a european network of health promoting schools in scotland [8], note that ‘there needs to be greater recognition of the time it takes to achieve such change and the support schools need to actively engage the whole school community in pursuing the hps ideology’(p70). At a broader level, the potential of school-based interventions may be limited by the fact that the major drivers of the obesity epidemic are changes in food production, marketing, and distribution that lie well beyond the purview of schools [42]. Intervention was intended to provide a catalyst to stimulate schools to address the integrated domains of health, education, learning and wellbeing, while acknowledging the social, cultural and other drivers that operate within a school environment. It didn’t approach the issue of obesity prevention with a defined program aiming for a quick fix, but instead acknowledged the variation in school community contexts.

It also incorporates the criteria for success identified in a process evaluation review of health promoting school studies - customising the intervention to the context, and providing ongoing training and support to teachers to develop and implement programs [7]. It foreshadowed the focus on environmental changes, equity and costs advocated in the 2011 update of the cochrane review of interventions for preventing obesity in children [2]. Given that intervention schools tended to target healthy eating first in the development and implementation of their intervention strategies, it is not surprising that the longer period of exposure to changes in the food environment translated into changes in food behaviours, although there were no intervention effects on other measures of dietary outcomes [43]. The cross-sectional findings for individual behaviours and health outcomes were supported by the smaller longitudinal cohort is acknowledged there may have been a seasonal effect on the physical activity and eating behaviour results given that data collection extended across seasons but that this should not have differentiated between intervention and comparison schools. It is also possible that some children within the intervention schools were not exposed to intervention and conversely some children in comparison schools may have benefited from health promotion strategies employed by the school. This is positive in terms of promoting healthy school environments [9] but highlights the challenges of conducting intervention trials in community settings [46]. A matched sample would also have meant that if one school drops out, as did happen in this study, the matched pair would have been lost from the analysis as the specific health promoting actions of schools varied with the differing strengths, needs and culture of individual schools, we identified real changes in school policies, environments and practices to improve healthy eating and increase physical activity. Overall the proportion of intervention schools with written physical activity and school-wide healthy eating policies was markedly higher than in comparison schools. Intervention schools also instituted a greater number of health promoting practices targeting students, staff and parents. Engagement of parents is recognised as a highly challenging component of health promoting schools interventions and an important characteristic of complex school systems [9]. Exit interviews with principals of intervention schools supported this approach with demonstrated changes in many schools in the environment, programs and the social norms of the school since the commencement of the fun ‘n healthy in moreland! Some school communities had a high proportion of families committed to healthy eating and physical activity which supported changes in the schools. Linking strategies to other key messages such as an environmental policy was also found to be successful in the fun ‘n healthy in moreland! Strength of the fun ‘n healthy intervention approach was the relatively low cost of the provision of a community development worker (cdw) (equating to $229 per student across the 3. However, the demographic profile at follow-up was not markedly different and inclusion of socio-demographic characteristics into the multivariable analysis had little impact on the effect intervention study was implemented over a period of time where there was a heightened media attention on childhood obesity, an increasing investment of state government funding into non-government organisation led initiatives for healthy eating and physical activity. Mid-way through the study period, a statewide school awards program on healthy eating and physical activity policies and behaviour change strategies was introduced [48].

Year intervention demonstrates that it is possible to effect system level change and some improvements in health and wellbeing outcomes from investments that focus on the school environment and aim to be long-term, evidence-based and encompassing of the complexities that are real for schools, families and in particular those who are less economically privileged. A long term commitment to addressing the needs of school communities, and a knowledge-broker/ community development approach, is likely to be most effective in achieving policy, curriculum, behavior and health outcome promoting schools conomic -economic index for ity development for life year al institute for health ledgementsthe authors wish to acknowledge: the contribution of merri community health services staff and board as key project champion and research partner, led by phillip moran, maree kulkens and christine armit; community development workers, liz moore, veronika pradel, coralie mathews*, rebecca shepherd and shareen nakhuda and health promotion in schools co-ordinator, maryanne tadic; all those who contributed to the scientific development of this project, the participating schools, parents, children and the data collection research team including rosie ashbolt, kay gibbons, orla walsh, michael booth, sing kai lo, jan garrard, and dionne holland. Lisa gibbs and elizabeth waters* acknowledge the salary support provided by the jack brockhoff ukoumunne is funded by the national institute for health research (nihr) collaboration for leadership in applied health research and care (clahrc) for the south west peninsula at the royal devon and exeter nhs foundation trust. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the nhs and the nihr or the department of health in bility of data and data from this study will not be shared because it was not a condition of original consent from the participating schools, staff or s’ contributionslgi was the project manager for this study and was responsible for staffing, budgets, liaison with community partners, coordinating intervention implementation, data collection and management and data analysis. Parents provided written consent on behalf of children and additional verbal assent was sought from children at the time of data t for s ca and mt were employed by merri community health services at the time of the authors have no other financial or non-financial competing interests to er nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional s’ affiliations(1)jack brockhoff child health and wellbeing program, centre for health equity, melbourne school of population and global health, university of melbourne(2)family and community support services, merri health(3)nihr clahrc south west peninsula (penclahrc), university of exeter medical school, university of exeter (4)nutrition and dietetics, flinders university(5)early start research institute, university of wollongong(6)institute for safety, compensation and recovery research (iscrr)(7)murdoch childrens research institute, parenting research centre and department of paediatrics, university of melbourne(8)body image and health promotion consultant & educator(9)global obesity centre, deakin university(10)school of population health, university of auckland(11)decipher, school of social sciences, cardiff university(12)school of health and social development, deakin university(13)school of public health and preventive medicine, monash ons & , zotero, reference manager, refworks (. Behavior, health promotion and use cookies to improve your experience with our information about our cookie policy.