Background: Marketing of ultra-processed foods (UPFs) can influence purchase intentions and consumption of such foods, especially among children. There is limited evidence on the extent to which UPFs are marketed around schools in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), including Kenya. We assessed the extent, content, and type of advertising of ultra-processed/unhealthy foods around schools in urban and rural settings in Kenya. Methods: This cross-sectional study assessed advertising of food and beverages within a 250m radius around schools in Kenya between June to July 2021. We conducted the study in three counties (Nairobi-urban, Mombasa-coastal urban city, and Baringo-rural). Each county was stratified into high and low socioeconomic status (SES) sub-counties. Within each, we randomly selected schools and collected detailed information on advertising around the schools. The information gathered included the location, type of food and beverage product advertised, and the promotional techniques used.  We used the NOVA classification and International Network for Food and Obesity/NCDs Research Monitoring and Action Support (INFORMAS) methods to categorize the food and beverages advertised based on processing level and core (healthy)/non-core(unhealthy) groups. We determined the extent of advertisements using descriptive analysis frequencies, and median (interquartile ranges). Poisson regression was used to determine the factors associated with UPF advertisements. Results: In total, 2300 food and beverage advertisements were mapped around the 500 schools. There was a higher median number of advertisements in urban areas (median=25, Interquartile range (IQR)=25,160) compared to rural areas (median=10, IQR= 4, 13). Of these advertisements, approximately 48.0% were UPFs. The most common promotional strategy used was cartoon and company-owned characters, while the most frequent premium offer was price discounts. In the multivariate analysis, there was a significantly higher rate of advertisements of UPFs in Baringo County (prevalence rate ratios (PRR): 1.17, 95% CI: 1.01-1.36) compared to the urban Nairobi County, and in lower compared to higher SES settings (PRR: 1.10, 95% CI: 1.01-1.20). Conclusion:  UPFs are frequently advertised around schools with promotional strategies that may be appealing to children. There is a need to restrict the marketing of unhealthy foods around schools to children in Kenya.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

This research was funded by The International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Canada, to the African Population and Health Research Centre (APHRC) and The SA MRC Centre for Health Economics and Decision Science /PRICELESS, Grant number: 1019132-001. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Not Applicable

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The study protocol was approved by the AMREF-Health Ethics and Scientific Review Committee in Kenya (ESRC/P901/2020) and the National Commission for Science, Technology, (NACOSTI- P/22/19104). Permission and mobilization were done to the school heads and subcounty level administration.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Not Applicable

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Not Applicable

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Not Applicable

The datasets for this study can be available upon reasonable requests by researchers. The data request will undergo data sharing agreement policy review and guidelies at the African Population and Health Research Centre.