Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24625144›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of public health2015

Impact of a Rewards-Based Incentive Program on Promoting Fruit and Vegetable Purchases.

Etienne J Phipps, Leonard E Braitman, Shana D Stites, S Brook Singletary, Samantha L Wallace, Lacy Hunt, Saul Axelrod, Karen Glanz, Nadine Uplinger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. The 'Eat Well @ IGA' healthy supermarket randomised controlled trial: process evaluation.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2021
    Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. A process evaluation of the Supermarket Healthy Eating for Life (SHELf) randomized controlled trial.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2016
    Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Etienne J PhippsEtienne J. Phipps, Shana D. Stites, S. Brook Singletary, and Samantha L. Wallace are with the Center for Urban Health Policy and Research; Leonard E. Braitman and Lacy Hunt are with the Office of Research and Technology; and Nadine Uplinger is with the Gutman Diabetes Institute, Einstein Healthcare Network, Philadelphia, PA. Saul Axelrod is with the Special Education and Applied Behavior Analysis Programs, Temple University, Philadelphia. Karen Glanz is with the Perelman School of Medicine and School of Nursing, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Leonard E Braitman
Shana D Stites
S Brook Singletary
Samantha L Wallace
Lacy Hunt
Saul Axelrod
Karen Glanz
Nadine Uplinger

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives. We assessed the impact of a rewards-based incentive program on fruit and vegetable purchases by low-income families. Methods. We conducted a 4-phase prospective cohort study with randomized intervention and wait-listed control groups in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, in December 2010 through October 2011. The intervention provided a rebate of 50% of the dollar amount spent on fresh or frozen fruit and vegetables, reduced to 25% during a tapering phase, then eliminated. Primary outcome measures were number of servings of fruit and of vegetables purchased per week. Results. Households assigned to the intervention purchased an average of 8 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.5, 16.9) more servings of vegetables and 2.5 (95% CI = 0.3, 9.5) more servings of fruit per week than did control households. In longitudinal price-adjusted analyses, when the incentive was reduced and then discontinued, the amounts purchased were similar to baseline. Conclusions. Investigation of the financial costs and potential benefits of incentive programs to supermarkets, government agencies, and other stakeholders is needed to identify sustainable interventions.

Identifiers

PMID24625144
PMCPMC4265942

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.