Modelling population responses to workplace minimum dietary standards introduced as workers return after social lockdowns.
Agent based model
Behaviour
Diet
Norms
Spill over
Journal
BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 12 2022
20 12 2022
Historique:
received:
30
03
2022
accepted:
25
11
2022
entrez:
20
12
2022
pubmed:
21
12
2022
medline:
23
12
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Diet norms are the shared social behaviours and beliefs about diets. In many societies, including the UK, these norms are typically linked to unhealthy diets and impede efforts to improve food choices. Social interactions that could influence one another's food choices, were highly disrupted during the lockdowns in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. A return to workplaces and re-establishment of eating networks may present an opportunity to influence dietary norms by introducing minimum dietary standards to in workplaces, which could then spread through wider home and workplace networks. An agent-based model was constructed to simulate a society reflecting the structure of a city population (1000 households) to explore changes in personal and social diet-related norms. The model tracked individual meal choices as agents interact in home, work or school settings and recorded changes in diet quality (range 1 to 100). Scenarios were run to compare individuals' diet quality with the introduction of minimum dietary standards with degrees of working from home. The more people mixed at work the greater the impact of minimum standards on improving diet norms. Socially isolated households remained unaffected by minimum standards, whereas household members exposed directly, in workplaces or schools, or indirectly, influenced by others in the household, had a large and linear increase in diet quality in relation to minimum standards (0.48 [95% CI 0.34, 0.62] per unit increase in minimum standards). Since individuals regressed to the new population mean, a small proportion of diets decreased toward lower population norms. The degree of return to work influenced the rate and magnitude of change cross the population (-2.4 points [-2.40, -2.34] in mean diet quality per 20% of workers isolating). These model results illustrate the qualitative impact social connectivity could have on changing diets through interventions. Norms can be changed more in a more connected population, and social interactions spread norms between contexts and amplified the influence of, for example, workplace minimum standards beyond those directly exposed. However, implementation of minimum standards in a single type of setting would not reach the whole population and in some cases may decrease diet quality. Any non-zero standard could yield improvements beyond the immediate adult workforce and this could spill between social contexts, but would be contingent on population connectivity.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Diet norms are the shared social behaviours and beliefs about diets. In many societies, including the UK, these norms are typically linked to unhealthy diets and impede efforts to improve food choices. Social interactions that could influence one another's food choices, were highly disrupted during the lockdowns in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. A return to workplaces and re-establishment of eating networks may present an opportunity to influence dietary norms by introducing minimum dietary standards to in workplaces, which could then spread through wider home and workplace networks.
METHODS
An agent-based model was constructed to simulate a society reflecting the structure of a city population (1000 households) to explore changes in personal and social diet-related norms. The model tracked individual meal choices as agents interact in home, work or school settings and recorded changes in diet quality (range 1 to 100). Scenarios were run to compare individuals' diet quality with the introduction of minimum dietary standards with degrees of working from home.
RESULTS
The more people mixed at work the greater the impact of minimum standards on improving diet norms. Socially isolated households remained unaffected by minimum standards, whereas household members exposed directly, in workplaces or schools, or indirectly, influenced by others in the household, had a large and linear increase in diet quality in relation to minimum standards (0.48 [95% CI 0.34, 0.62] per unit increase in minimum standards). Since individuals regressed to the new population mean, a small proportion of diets decreased toward lower population norms. The degree of return to work influenced the rate and magnitude of change cross the population (-2.4 points [-2.40, -2.34] in mean diet quality per 20% of workers isolating).
CONCLUSIONS
These model results illustrate the qualitative impact social connectivity could have on changing diets through interventions. Norms can be changed more in a more connected population, and social interactions spread norms between contexts and amplified the influence of, for example, workplace minimum standards beyond those directly exposed. However, implementation of minimum standards in a single type of setting would not reach the whole population and in some cases may decrease diet quality. Any non-zero standard could yield improvements beyond the immediate adult workforce and this could spill between social contexts, but would be contingent on population connectivity.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36539744
doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-14729-x
pii: 10.1186/s12889-022-14729-x
pmc: PMC9763797
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2390Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
PLoS Med. 2016 Apr 05;13(4):e1001990
pubmed: 27046234
Appetite. 2011 Jun;56(3):747-52
pubmed: 21396972
Nature. 2014 Nov 27;515(7528):518-22
pubmed: 25383533
Appetite. 2011 Dec;57(3):623-7
pubmed: 21843568
J Am Diet Assoc. 2002 Mar;102(3 Suppl):S40-51
pubmed: 11902388
Emerg Themes Epidemiol. 2021 Jul 30;18(1):10
pubmed: 34330302
Front Psychol. 2019 Mar 01;10:345
pubmed: 30881326
Lancet Public Health. 2021 Sep;6(9):e648-e660
pubmed: 34454642
Lancet. 2019 Feb 23;393(10173):791-846
pubmed: 30700377
Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2017 Dec 12;57(18):3942-3958
pubmed: 27712088
Annu Rev Psychol. 2004;55:591-621
pubmed: 14744228
Curr Obes Rep. 2019 Dec;8(4):495-503
pubmed: 31654336
J Hum Nutr Diet. 2009 Apr;22(2):89-99
pubmed: 19302115
Health Psychol Rev. 2016 Sep;10(3):326-40
pubmed: 26878931
Obes Rev. 2017 Feb;18(2):214-226
pubmed: 27860169
Food Nutr Bull. 2011 Dec;32(4):365-75
pubmed: 22590970
Lancet Planet Health. 2021 Oct;5(10):e699-e708
pubmed: 34627474
BMC Public Health. 2017 Oct 17;17(1):818
pubmed: 29041899
Prev Med Rep. 2020 May 28;19:101133
pubmed: 32642402
Nat Hum Behav. 2021 Oct;5(10):1349-1357
pubmed: 33888881
BMJ. 2020 Jul 15;370:m2743
pubmed: 32669358
Psychol Sci. 2007 May;18(5):429-34
pubmed: 17576283