{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016861219195849545, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0025940337224383916, 'mean_word_length': 4.8893129770992365, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Systematic review with analysis of bias and quality of interventions in the food environment of the workplace and their impact on the nutritional status of workers].

INTRODUCTION
workers' exposure to unhealthy eating is linked to the increase in overweight and obesity.


OBJECTIVE
this systematic review aims to analyze with bias and quality analysis the effect of interventions in the food environment of the workplace on the nutritional status of workers.


METHODS
the search was conducted in three electronic databases according to the Cochrane Collaboration and eight studies were included. Data were grouped according to type of environmental intervention, and methodological quality and validity with risk of bias was analyzed.


RESULTS
three studies had effects on reducing BMI and body weight, but one was judged to be reliable evidence of effectiveness, as they were at low risk of bias. Half of the included articles were assessed at high risk of bias (3/8) and unclear risk of bias (1/8), due to errors in selection and performance and missing data in the results.


CONCLUSIONS
we conclude that there is not enough evidence to indicate that these types of interventions have an effect on body weight. To make effective interventions, the design of these studies has to avoid potential sources of bias, which were analyzed in detail in this study. The global food environment of workers and not just their workplace must be considered, deepening the interaction that exists between socioeconomic factors and food environments.