Megan Rollo

Dr. Megan Rollo

Priority Research Centre in Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, ATC 309H, ATC Building, Callaghan, New South Wales 2308, Australia
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

16Years (2011-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
29 April 2016 in British Journal of Nutrition
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TBTamara Bucher
Tamara Bucher
CCClare Collins
Clare Collins
MRMegan Rollo
Megan Rollo
TMTracy A McCaffrey
Tracy A McCaffrey
NVNienke De Vlieger
Nienke De Vlieger
Federico J.A. Perez-CuetoFederico J.A. Perez-Cueto
Federico J.A. Perez-Cueto
Nudging or ‘choice architecture’ refers to strategic changes in the environment that are anticipated to alter people’s behaviour in a predictable way, without forbidding any options or significantly changing their economic incentives. Nudging strategies may be used to promote healthy eating behaviour. However, to date, the scientific evidence has not been systematically reviewed to enable practitioners and policymakers to implement, or argue for the implementation of, specific measures to support nudging strategies. This systematic review investigated the effect of positional changes of food placement on food choice. In total, seven scientific databases were searched using relevant keywords to identify interventions that manipulated food position (proximity or order) to generate a change in food selection, sales or consumption, among normal-weight or overweight individuals across any age group. From 2576 identified articles, fifteen articles comprising eighteen studies met our inclusion criteria. This review has identified that manipulation of food product order or proximity can influence food choice. Such approaches offer promise in terms of impacting on consumer behaviour. However, there is a need for high-quality studies that quantify the magnitude of positional effects on food choice in conjunction with measuring the impact on food intake, particularly in the longer term. Future studies should use outcome measures such as change in grams of food consumed or energy intake to quantify the impact on dietary intake and potential impacts on nutrition-related health. Research is also needed to evaluate potential compensatory behaviours secondary to such interventions.

5 March 2015 in Obesity Reviews
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Melinda HutchessonMelinda Hutchesson
Melinda Hutchesson
MRMegan Rollo
Megan Rollo
RKR. Krukowski
R. Krukowski
LEL. Ells
L. Ells
JHJ. Harvey
J. Harvey
CCC. E. Collins
C. E. Collins

1 October 2014 in Clinical Nutrition
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
CCClare Collins
Clare Collins
MBMay M. Boggess
May M. Boggess
JWJane F. Watson
Jane F. Watson
MGMaya Guest
Maya Guest
Kerith DuncansonKerith Duncanson
Kerith Duncanson
Tracy BurrowsTracy Burrows
Tracy Burrows

17 December 2019 in Frontiers in Endocrinology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Tracy BurrowsTracy Burrows
Tracy Burrows
YHYan Yee Ho
Yan Yee Ho
MRMegan Rollo
Megan Rollo
CCClare E. Collins
Clare E. Collins
Accuracy in quantifying energy intake (EI) using common dietary assessment methods is crucial for interpreting the relationship between diet and chronic disease. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the validity of dietary assessment methods used to estimate the EI of adults in comparison to total energy expenditure (TEE) measured by doubly labeled water (DLW). Articles in English across nine electronic databases, published between 1973 and February 2019 were retrieved. Studies were included if participants were adults (≥18 years) and used the DLW technique to measure TEE compared to self-reported EI. A total of 59 studies were included, with a total of 6,298 free living adults and a mean of 107 participants per study. The majority of studies including 16 studies that included a technology based method reported significant (P < 0.05) under-reporting of EI when compared to TEE, with few over-reporting EI. Misreporting was more frequent among females compared to males within recall based dietary assessment methods. The degree of under-reporting was highly variable within studies using the same method, with 24 h recalls having less variation and degree of under-reporting compared to other methods.

23 January 2015 in Nutrients
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CCClare Collins
Clare Collins
TBTracy L. Burrows
Tracy L. Burrows
MRMegan Rollo
Megan Rollo
MBMay M. Boggess
May M. Boggess
JWJane F. Watson
Jane F. Watson
Melinda HutchessonMelinda Hutchesson
Melinda Hutchesson
Adult diet quality indices are shown to predict nutritional adequacy of dietary intake as well as all-cause morbidity and mortality. This study describes the reproducibility and validity of a food-based diet quality index, the Australian Recommended Food Score (ARFS). ARFS was developed to reflect alignment with the Australian Dietary Guidelines and is modelled on the US Recommended Food Score. Dietary intakes of 96 adult participants (31 male, 65 female) age 30 to 75 years were assessed in two rounds, five months apart. Diet was assessed using a 120-question semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire (FFQ). The ARFS diet quality index was derived using a subset of 70 items from the full FFQ. Reproducibility of the ARFS between round one and round two was confirmed by the overall intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.87 (95% CI 0.83, 0.90), which compared favourably to that for the FFQ at 0.85 (95% CI 0.80, 0.89). ARFS was correlated with FFQ nutrient intakes, particularly fiber, vitamin A, beta-carotene and vitamin C (0.53, 95% CI 0.37–0.67), and with mineral intakes, particularly calcium, magnesium and potassium (0.32, 95% CI 0.23–0.40). ARFS is a suitable brief tool to evaluate diet quality in adults and reliably estimates a range of nutrient intakes.

5 December 2016 in American Journal of Men's Health
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
LALee Ashton
Lee Ashton
Melinda HutchessonMelinda Hutchesson
Melinda Hutchesson
MRMegan Rollo
Megan Rollo
PMPhilip J. Morgan
Philip J. Morgan
CCClare Collins
Clare Collins
Many Australian young men (18-25 years) fail to meet recommendations in national dietary or physical activity (PA) guidelines. However, there is a lack of understanding of their perspectives on PA and diet to inform intervention design. This study examined young men’s motivators and barriers to healthy eating and PA, along with differences by demographic and behavioral factors. A cross-sectional online survey was completed by 282 men aged 18 to 25 years in Australia. Results identified the most common motivators for healthy eating included improving health (63.5%), body image (52.3%), and increasing energy (32.1%). Motivators for PA included improving body image (44.6%), fitness (44.2%), and health (41.0%). Common barriers to healthy eating were access to unhealthy foods (61.1%), time to cook/prepare healthy foods (55.0%), and motivation to cook healthy foods (50.7%). Barriers for PA included motivation (66.3%), time (57.8%), and cost of equipment/facilities (33.3%). Significant differences (p < .01) in motivators to healthy eating and/or PA were identified for BMI category, marital status, PA level, alcohol intake, and stress levels. Significant differences were identified for barriers to healthy eating and/or PA by BMI, PA level, stress, and fruit and vegetable intake, assessed using Pearson’s chi-square test. Findings suggest that promotion of benefits related to health, appearance/body image, increased energy and fitness, and addressing key barriers including motivation, time, financial restraints, and accessibility of unhealthy foods, could engage young men in improving lifestyle behaviors. Differences by demographic and behavioral factors suggest development of tailored programs to address diversity among young men may be required.