Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33364152›Full record

ReviewPreventive medicine reports2021

Process evaluation of fruit and vegetables distribution interventions in school-based settings: A systematic review.

Mariam R Ismail, Jamie A Seabrook, Jason A Gilliland

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Preventive medicine reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Children's perceptions of a Centrally Procured School Food Program in southwestern Ontario, Canada.Health promotion and chronic disease prevention in Canada : research, policy and practice · 2021
    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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mariam R IsmailSchool of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Jamie A SeabrookSchool of Food and Nutritional Sciences, Brescia University College, Department of Paediatrics, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Human Environments Analysis Laboratory, Western University, Children's Health Research Institute, Lawson Health Research Institute, London, Ontario, Canada.
Jason A GillilandDepartment of Geography, School of Health Studies, Department of Paediatrics, Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Human Environments Analysis Laboratory, Western University, Children's Health Research Institute, Lawson Health Research Institute, London, Ontario, Canada.
Western University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the importance of process evaluation in program evaluations, research has focused primarily on the effectiveness of fruit and vegetables (FVs) distribution interventions on children's consumption, with little attention given to how these interventions achieve their outcomes. Five bibliographic databases (Embase, PubMed, ProQuest, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection) were searched in June 2019 for studies of interventions where the main focus was the implementation of distributed FVs to school-aged children as a snack. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) tool was used to appraise the risk of bias within included studies. Data were extracted based on study characteristics and findings. Results identified 24 studies reporting on 11 interventions and 1 policy. The findings of this systematic review indicate that the majority of the studies included limited references to implementation research. Recurring limitations include an absence of an evaluation theoretical framework and the data collection methods used. Also, several factors were identified as informing the success of snack-based FVs distribution programs, including participation of the school community, school characteristics, background knowledge, and parental engagement. Lack of timely FVs delivery, limited funding, inadequate awareness about the program, insufficient teachers' time, and food waste were identified as challenges to successful programming. Findings indicate that distributing FVs to school-aged children as a snack can increase their consumption, but only with proper implementation. Further evaluative research is required to better inform future implementation of snack-based FV distribution interventions in school settings.

Indexed as

Child healthEvaluation researchFruit and vegetablesHealth promotionHealthy eatingImplementation scienceSchoolsSnacks

Identifiers

PMID33364152
PMCPMC7753971
OpenAlexW3110866857

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.