Search

Yvonne C. Anderson1,2,∗, Tami L. Cave1,2, Vicki J. Cunningham3, Nicola M. Pereira4, Donna M. Woolerton5, Cameron C. Grant6, Wayne S. Cutfield1, Jose G.B. Derraik 1, Paul L. Hofman1 1 Liggins Institute, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand 2 Taranaki Base Hospital, New Plymouth, New Zealand 3 Child Health Centre, Northland District Health Board, Whangarei, New Zealand 4 Child Health Service, Midcentral District Health Board, Palmerston North, New Zealand 5Waikids, Waikato District Health Board, Waikato, New Zealand 6 Department of Paediatrics, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

help evaluate the nature of the ‘healthiness’ of the food environment in these neighbourhoods. 24 different food outlet types were identified from an observational audit of Australian suburbs’ food environments. A purpose-designed questionnaire was developed to obtain expert opinion on the relative healthiness of food outlet types using Delphi method with two survey rounds. At the beginning of the Delphi survey, original scores were proposed for each food outlet type based on available literature, classifying them into 5 categories of ‘healthiness’. Median scores for food outlet types from Rounds 1 and 2 were highly correlated with the originally proposed scores (0.97 and 0.96 respectively, p = 0.01). A ‘healthiness’ score is proposed using the median scores of round 2 of this survey to compare food environment across Australian suburbs; and further studies can explore relationships between the suburbs ‘healthiness’ score and diet habits of the suburbs population.

Tami L. Cave1,2,∗, Michelle S. Butler 1, Kris R. Moller 3, Katharine F. Treves1, Cervantee E.K. Wild1,2, Lisa E. Wynter1, Cameron C. Grant4, Paul L. Hofman2, Yvonne C. Anderson1,2 1 Department of Paediatrics, Taranaki District Health Board, New Plymouth, New Zealand 2 Liggins Institute, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand 3Whanau Pakari, Sport Taranaki, New Plymouth, New Zealand 4 Department of Paediatrics, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

nutrition and diet. Grants with a primary focus on adults and health conditions directly associated with obesity (e.g. key modifiable risk factor) were included (i.e. CVD, diabetes). Grants related to infants/children/adolescents or animals or that did not clearly stipulate adults were excluded. Major findings: For NHMRC it was found that 24 projects/development grants and 12 fellowships ($41,179,720) were funded, equating to 1% of total available NHMRC funding. For ARC there was inadequate information for ARC fellowships available to permit classification for this project. For ARC discovery projects with the included FOR codes a total of three projects were identified, accounting for approximately 9% ($760,540) of total available funding that was allocated. Conclusion: Only a small proportion of federal funds were allocated to obesity research from 2009 to 2014 despite this major public health concern being specifically aligned to National Research Priorities.