ArticlePublic health nutrition2016
School staff, parent and student perceptions of a Breakfast in the Classroom model during initial implementation.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A scoping review of interventions aiming to improve food security for low-income families with school-aged children outside of school hours.Journal of nutritional science · 2025Article
- Key determinants to school breakfast program implementation in Philadelphia public schools: Implications for the role of SNAP-Ed.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Prevalence of Evidence-Based School Meal Practices and Associations with Reported Food Waste across a National Sample of U.S. Elementary Schools.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Nutritional, Economic, and Environmental Costs of Milk Waste in a Classroom School Breakfast Program.American journal of public health · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo understand perspectives of stakeholders during initial district-wide implementation of a Breakfast in the Classroom (BIC) model of the School Breakfast Program.
designQualitative data were collected from twenty-nine focus groups and twenty interviews with stakeholders in a school district early in the process of implementing a BIC model of the School Breakfast Program.
settingTen elementary schools within a large, urban school district in the USA that served predominantly low-income, racial/ethnic minority students. SUBJECTS: Purposively selected stakeholders in elementary schools that had implemented BIC for 3-6 months: students (n 85), parents/guardians (n 86), classroom teachers (n 44), cafeteria managers (n 10) and principals (n 10).
resultsFour primary themes emerged, which were interpreted based on the Diffusion of Innovations model. School staff had changed their perceptions of both the relative disadvantages and costs related to time and effort of BIC over time; the majority of each stakeholder group expressed an appreciation for BIC; student breakfast consumption varied from day to day, related to compatibility of foods with child preferences; and stakeholders held mixed and various impressions of BIC's potential impacts.
conclusionsThe study underscores the importance of engaging school staff and parents in discussions of BIC programming prior to its initiation to pre-emptively address concerns related to cost, relative disadvantages and compatibility with child preferences and school routines/workflow. Effectively communicating with stakeholders about positive impacts and nutritional value of the meals may improve support for BIC. These findings provide new information to policy makers, districts and practitioners that can be used to improve implementation efforts, model delivery and outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.