Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33106203›Full record

ArticlePublic health nutrition2021

Investigating differences between traditional (paper bag) ordering and online ordering from primary school canteens: a cross-sectional study comparing menu, usage and lunch order characteristics.

Alecia Leonard, Tessa Delaney, Kirsty Seward, Rachel Zoetemeyer, Hannah Lamont, Rachel Sutherland, Kathryn Reilly, Christophe Lecathelinais, Rebecca Wyse

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public health nutrition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Alecia LeonardSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
Tessa DelaneySchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
Kirsty SewardSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
Rachel ZoetemeyerSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
Hannah LamontSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
Rachel SutherlandSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
Kathryn ReillySchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
Christophe LecathelinaisSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
Rebecca WyseSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
University of Newcastle Australia · AUHunter New England Local Health District · AUHunter Medical Research Institute · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess differences between traditional paper bag ordering and online ordering from primary school canteens in terms of menu, usage and lunch order characteristics.

designA cross-sectional study.

settingNew South Wales (NSW) primary schools that offered both paper bag and online canteen ordering.

participantsStudents (aged 5-12 years) with a lunch order on the day of the observation.

resultsAcross the six school canteens, 59-90 % of all available items were listed on both the online and paper menus, with no significant differences in the nutritional quality ('Everyday'/'Occasional') or nutritional content (kJ/saturated fat/sugar/sodium) of menu items. In total, 387 student lunch orders were placed, containing 776 menu items. Most orders (68 %) were placed online. There were no significant differences between order modality in the quantity of items ordered or the cost of orders, or the nutritional quality of orders based on the classification system of the NSW Healthy School Canteen Strategy ('Everyday'/'Occasional'). However, nutritional analysis revealed that paper bag orders contained 222 fewer kJ than online orders (P = 0·001), 0·65 g less saturated fat (P = 0·04) and 4·7 g less sugar (P < 0·001).

conclusionsOnline canteens are commonly used to order canteen lunches for primary school children. This is the first study to investigate differences between traditional paper bag ordering and online ordering in this setting. Given the rapid increase in the use of online ordering systems in schools and other food settings and their potential to deliver public health nutrition interventions, additional research is warranted to further investigate differences in ordering modalities.

Indexed as

Food ServicesLunchChildCross-Sectional StudiesDiet, HealthyHumansSchoolsCanteenCanteen site visitsChildrenNutritionOnline orderingPaper bag ordersSchool lunches

Identifiers

PMID33106203
PMCPMC10195518
OpenAlexW3094225301

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.