DESIGN: The Healthy Food-Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI) comprises forty-seven indicators of government policy practice. Local evidence of each indicator was compiled from government institutions and verified by related government stakeholders. The extent of implementation of the policies was rated by experts against international best practices. Rating results were used to identify and propose policy actions which were subsequently prioritised by the experts based on 'importance' and 'achievability' criteria. The policy actions with relatively higher 'achievability' and 'importance' were set as priority recommendations for government action.
SETTING: Malaysia.
SUBJECTS: Twenty-six local experts.
RESULTS: Majority (62 %) of indicators was rated 'low' implementation with no indicator rated as either 'high' or 'very little, if any' in terms of implementation. The top five recommendations were (i) restrict unhealthy food marketing in children's settings and (ii) on broadcast media; (iii) mandatory nutrition labelling for added sugars; (iv) designation of priority research areas related to obesity prevention and diet-related non-communicable diseases; and (v) introduce energy labelling on menu boards for fast-food outlets.
CONCLUSIONS: This first policy study conducted in Malaysia identified a number of gaps in implementation of key policies to promote healthy food environments, compared with international best practices. Study findings could strengthen civil society advocacies for government accountability to create a healthier food environment.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to assess the psychobehavioral responses to the COVID-19 outbreak and examine their associations with mass and social media exposure.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study among medical and health sciences students from the Fujian Medical University in Fuzhou, China, was conducted between April 6-22, 2020.
RESULTS: A total of 2086 completed responses were received. Multivariable analyses demonstrated that four constructs of the Health Belief Model (HBM)-higher perception of susceptibility (odds ratio [OR] 1.44; 95% CI 1.07-1.94), severity (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.10-1.59), self-efficacy (OR 1.61; 95% CI 1.21-2.15), and perceived control or intention to carry out prevention measures (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.09-1.59)-were significantly associated with a higher mass media exposure score, whereas only three constructs-higher perception of severity (OR 1.43; 95% CI 1.19-1.72), self-efficacy (OR 1.85; 95% CI 1.38-2.48), and perceived control or intention to carry out prevention measures (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.08-1.58)-were significantly associated with a higher social media exposure score. Lower emotional consequences and barriers to carry out prevention measures were also significantly associated with greater mass and social media exposure. Our findings on anxiety levels revealed that 38.1% (n=795; 95% CI 36.0-40.2) of respondents reported moderate-to-severe anxiety. A lower anxiety level was significantly associated with higher mass and social media exposure in the univariable analyses; however, the associations were not significant in the multivariable analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: In essence, both mass and social media are useful means of disseminating health messages and contribute to the betterment of psychobehavioral responses to COVID-19. Our findings stress the importance of the credibility of information shared through mass and social media outlets and viable strategies to counter misinformation during a pandemic.
METHODS: Participants aged ≥40 years (n = 730) from randomly selected households in Selangor State Malaysia, completed interview-based assessments. Campaign reach was assessed in terms of responses to an adapted questionnaire that was used in evaluations in other countries. The impact of the campaign was assessed in terms of awareness, confidence to detect symptoms and self-efficacy to discuss symptoms with a doctor as captured by the Cancer Awareness Measure (CAM). CAM was administered before-and-after campaign implementation and responses by BCAC recognisers (i.e. participants who recognised one or more of the BCAC television, radio or print advertisements when prompted) and non-recognisers (i.e. participants who did not recognise any of the BCAC advertisements) were compared analytically. Logistic regression analysed comparative differences in cancer awareness by socio-demographic characteristics and recognition of the BCAC materials.
RESULTS: Over 65% of participants (n = 484) recognised the BCAC-CRC. Campaign-recognisers were significantly more likely to be aware of each CRC symptom at follow-up and were more confident about noticing symptoms (46.9% vs 34.9%, p = 0.018) compared to non-recognisers. There was no difference between groups in terms of self-efficacy to see a doctor about symptoms. Improved symptoms awareness at follow-up was lower for Indians compared to Malays (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.53, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.34, 0.83, p = 0.005). Health service use data did not indicate an increase in screening activity during or immediately after the campaign months.
CONCLUSION: Overall, the findings of the evaluation indicated that the culturally adapted, evidence-based mass media intervention improved CRC symptom awareness among the Malaysian population; and that impact is more likely when a campaign operates a differentiated approach that matches modes of communication to the ethnic and social diversity in a population.