Trial reportPublic health nutrition2020
How and why does discretionary food consumption change when we promote fruit and vegetables? Results from the ShopSmart randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in Public health nutrition, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Achieving high diet quality at eating occasions: findings from a nationally representative study of Australian adults.The British journal of nutrition · 2024Article
- Health behavior interventions among people with lower socio-economic position: a scoping review of behavior change techniques and effectiveness.Health psychology and behavioral medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe present study aimed to identify whether discretionary food consumption declined in an intervention focused primarily on promoting fruit and vegetable consumption. We also aimed to identify potential mediators explaining intervention effects on discretionary food consumption.
designSecondary analysis of data from the ShopSmart study, a randomised controlled trial involving a 6-month intervention promoting fruit and vegetable consumption. Linear regression models examined intervention effects on discretionary food consumption at intervention completion (T2). A half-longitudinal mediator analyses was performed to examine the potential mediating effect of personal and environmental factors on the association between the intervention effects and discretionary food consumption. Indirect (mediated) effects were tested by the product of coefficients method with bootstrapped se using Andrew Hayes' PROCESS macro for SPSS.
settingWomen were recruited via the Coles FlyBuys loyalty card database in socio-economically disadvantaged suburbs of Melbourne, Australia.
participantsAnalyses included 225 women (116 intervention and 109 control).
resultsCompared with controls, intervention participants consumed fewer discretionary foods at T2, after adjusting for key confounders (B = -0·194, 95 % CI -0·378, -0·010 servings/d; P = 0·039). While some mediators were associated with the outcome (taste, outcome expectancies, self-efficacy, time constraints), there was no evidence that they mediated intervention effects.
conclusionsThe study demonstrated that a behavioural intervention promoting fruit and vegetable consumption among socio-economically disadvantaged participants was effective in reducing discretionary food intake. Although specific mediators were not identified, researchers should continue searching for mechanisms by which interventions have an effect to guide future programme design.
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.