Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36243766›Full record

ArticleJournal of health, population, and nutrition2022

Which factors promote and prohibit successful implementation and normalization of a healthy school lunch program at primary schools in the Netherlands?

Ellen van Kleef, S Coosje Dijkstra, Jaap Seidell, Monique H Vingerhoeds, Ilse A Polet, Gertrude G Zeinstra

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of health, population, and nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ellen van KleefMarketing and Consumer Behaviour Group, Wageningen University, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN, Wageningen, The Netherlands. ellen.vankleef@wur.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-8797-6983
S Coosje DijkstraFaculty of Science, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1085, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jaap SeidellFaculty of Science, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1085, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Monique H VingerhoedsFood, Health and Consumer Research, Wageningen Food and Biobased Research, P.O. Box 17, 6700 AA, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Ilse A PoletFood, Health and Consumer Research, Wageningen Food and Biobased Research, P.O. Box 17, 6700 AA, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Gertrude G ZeinstraFood, Health and Consumer Research, Wageningen Food and Biobased Research, P.O. Box 17, 6700 AA, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Wageningen University & Research · NLVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NL

Funding

See document AF16098
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA school provided healthy lunch might help to improve the nutritional quality of children's lunches. However, in the Netherlands, school lunch programs are not common. The aim of this study was to identify factors that promote or inhibit the implementation of a school lunch program at primary schools, from the viewpoint of school professionals.

methodsA cross-sectional online survey was conducted among 204 primary school professionals. The normalization process theory and its four constructs (i.e. coherence, cognitive participation, collective action, reflective monitoring) were used to develop questions and interpret findings. Descriptive statistics were used for 14 multiple choice questions (yes, no, don't know) and thematic content analysis for qualitative responses.

resultsParticipants had a shared understanding about how a lunch program differed from current practices. Most participants had the same view on the rationale for implementation (coherence), such as equality among children. Sixty percent expected that a healthy school lunch will contribute to healthier eating by the children. Participants showed different degrees of cognitive participation (46% indicated that healthy school lunch is good idea). Commitment depended on their belief whether providing a healthy lunch was part of their responsibility as school and 30% expected a large effect on their daily work (collective action). When appraising school lunch implementation (reflective monitoring), participants' concerns focused on feasibility and adaptability of a program in their own school.

conclusionsThe introduction of a school lunch program will require substantial effort, although there is considerable support and understanding about potential benefits. The findings point to a number of preconditions for large-scale introduction, including the need for support-both financially and organizationally-bottom-up involvement of teachers, children and parents and freedom to adapt the program.

Indexed as

Food ServicesLunchChildCross-Sectional StudiesHumansNetherlandsNutritive ValueSchoolsImplementationNormalisation process theorySchool lunch program

Identifiers

PMID36243766
PMCPMC9569068
OpenAlexW4306291646

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.