In developed countries, persons of low socioeconomic status (SES) are generally less likely to consume diets consistent with dietary guidelines. Little is known about the mechanisms that underlie SES differences in eating behaviours. Since women are often responsible for dietary choices within households, this qualitative study investigated factors that may contribute to socioeconomic inequalities in dietary behaviour among women. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 19 high-, 19 mid- and 18 low- SES women, recruited from Melbourne, Australia, using an area-level indicator of SES. An ecological framework, in which individual, social and environmental level influences on diet were considered, was used to guide the development of interview questions and interpretation of the data. Thematic analysis was undertaken to identify the main themes emerging from the data. Several key influences varied by SES. These included food-related values such as health consciousness, and a lack of time due to family commitments (more salient among higher SES women), as well as perceived high cost of healthy eating and lack of time due to work commitments (more important for low SES women). Reported availability of and access to good quality healthy foods did not differ strikingly across SES groups. Public health strategies aimed at reducing SES inequalities in diet might focus on promoting healthy diets that are low cost, as well as promoting time-efficient food preparation strategies for all women.

Strategies to decrease socioeconomic inequalities in diet could involve promoting inexpensive ways to increase fruit and vegetable consumption, and ensuring that people of low SEP are aware that many healthy foods are available at relatively low cost. Future research should also confirm if perceptions match objective measures of food availability, accessibility and affordability, in order to address the real and/or perceived lack of healthy options in low SEP neighbourhoods.

No abstract

BackgroundIn the context of rising food prices, there is a need for evidence on the most effective approaches for promoting healthy eating. Individually-targeted behavioural interventions for increasing food-related skills show promise, but are unlikely to be effective in the absence of structural supports. Fiscal policies have been advocated as a means of promoting healthy eating and reducing obesity and nutrition-related disease, but there is little empirical evidence of their effectiveness. This paper describes the Supermarket Healthy Eating for LiFe (SHELf) study, a randomised controlled trial to investigate effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a tailored skill-building intervention and a price reduction intervention, separately and in combination, against a control condition for promoting purchase and consumption of healthy foods and beverages in women from high and low socioeconomic groups.Methods/designSHELf comprises a randomised controlled trial design, with participants randomised to receive either (1) a skill-building intervention; (2) price reductions on fruits, vegetables and low-joule soft drink beverages and water; (3) a combination of skill-building and price reductions; or (4) a control condition. Five hundred women from high and low socioeconomic areas will be recruited through a store loyalty card program and local media. Randomisation will occur on receipt of informed consent and baseline questionnaire. An economic evaluation from a societal perspective using a cost-consequences approach will compare the costs and outcomes between intervention and control groups.DiscussionThis study will build on a pivotal partnership with a major national supermarket chain and the Heart Foundation to investigate the effectiveness of intervention strategies aimed at increasing women's purchasing and consumption of fruits and vegetables and decreased purchasing and consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages. It will be among the first internationally to examine the effects of two promising approaches - skill-building and price reductions - on diet amongst women.Trial RegistrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN39432901

BackgroundThere is a need for evidence on the most effective and cost-effective approaches for promoting healthy eating among groups that do not meet dietary recommendations for good health, such as those with low incomes or experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage. This paper describes the ShopSmart 4 Health study, a randomised controlled trial conducted by Deakin University, Coles Supermarkets and the Heart Foundation, to investigate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a skill-building intervention for promoting increased purchasing and consumption of fruits and vegetables amongst women of low socioeconomic position (SEP).Methods/designShopSmart 4 Health employed a randomised controlled trial design. Women aged 18–60 years, holding a Coles store loyalty card, who shopped at Coles stores within socioeconomically disadvantaged neighbourhoods and met low-income eligibility criteria were invited to participate. Consenting women completed a baseline survey assessing food shopping and eating habits and food-related behaviours and attitudes. On receipt of their completed survey, women were randomised to either a skill-building intervention or a wait-list control condition. Intervention effects will be evaluated via self-completion surveys and using supermarket transaction sales data, collected at pre- and post-intervention and 6-month follow-up. An economic evaluation from a societal perspective using a cost-consequences approach will compare the costs and outcomes between intervention and control groups. Process evaluation will be undertaken to identify perceived value and effects of intervention components.DiscussionThis study will provide data to address the currently limited evidence base regarding the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of skill-building intervention strategies aimed at increasing fruit and vegetable consumption among socioeconomically disadvantaged women, a target group at high risk of poor diets.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN48771770