Use of qualitative systems mapping and causal loop diagrams to understand food environments, diet and obesity: a scoping review protocol

Converging perspectives on the processes exacerbating adolescent obesity: An integrative systems approach

Adolescent obesity is a complex public health challenge with steadily increasing and variable prevalence among countries. This paper synthesises the driving feedback mechanisms of adolescent obesity studied in the CO-CREATE project, furthering our understanding of the complexity of this issue. Using systems thinking principles and causal loop diagramming, we integrated the following knowledge and perspectives derived from diverse sources into a causal loop diagram (CLD): a systems map generated by adolescents through participatory modelling workshops, a comprehensive literature review, and input from subject-matter experts during validation workshops. We used a structured and iterative approach to include drivers and to identify feedback loops exacerbating adolescent obesity. The CLD identified 27 key feedback loops across four themes: twelve related to the commercial food environment, six to the physical activity environment, four to mental wellbeing and five to social norms. These loops indicate not only diet and physical activity as drivers of obesity but also stress and other emotional and social pressures. Recognising the imperative need to integrate the perspectives and experiences of adolescents into our analysis, this work advocates for the synthesis of experiential insights with empirical research. The integrated CLD can be used as a visual tool that fosters collaboration among stakeholders and engenders a more comprehensive and inclusive system understanding that can provide holistic intervention considerations to tackle adolescent obesity. Additionally, the CLD lays a foundation for subsequent quantitative modelling works to further address this issue and develop context-based approaches to prevention and evaluation of adolescent obesity.

Methods and measures to evaluate the impact of participatory model building on public policymakers: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Public policymakers are increasingly engaged in participatory model building processes, such as group model building. Understanding the impacts of policymaker participation in these processes on policymakers is important given that their decisions often have significant influence on the dynamics of complex systems that affect health. Little is known about the extent to which the impacts of participatory model building on public policymakers have been evaluated or the methods and measures used to evaluate these impacts.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A scoping review protocol was developed with the objectives of: (1) scoping studies that have evaluated the impacts of facilitated participatory model building processes on public policymakers who participated in these processes; and (2) describing methods and measures used to evaluate impacts and the main findings of these evaluations. The Joanna Briggs Institute's Population, Concept, Context framework was used to formulate the article identification process. Seven electronic databases-MEDLINE (Ovid), ProQuest Health and Medical, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase (Ovid), CINAHL Complete and PsycInfo-will be searched. Identified articles will be screened according to inclusion and exclusion criteria and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist for scoping reviews will be used and reported. A data extraction tool will collect information across three domains: study characteristics, methods and measures, and findings. The review will be conducted using Covidence, a systematic review data management platform.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The scoping review produced will generate an overview of how public policymaker engagement in participatory model building processes has been evaluated. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and to communities of practice that convene policymakers in participatory model building processes. This review will not require ethics approval because it is not human subject research.