Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37857305›Full record

Trial reportAnnals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine2024

A Cluster-Randomized Evaluation of the SuperShelf Intervention in Choice-Based Food Pantries.

Caitlin E Caspi, Maria F Gombi-Vaca, Christina Bliss Barsness, Nora Gordon, Marna Canterbury, Hikaru Hanawa Peterson, Julian Wolfson, Rebekah Pratt

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors.

Caitlin E CaspiUniversity of Connecticut, Department of Allied Health Sciences, Storrs, CT, USA.
Maria F Gombi-VacaUniversity of Connecticut, Rudd Center for Food Policy and Health, Hartford, CT, USA.
Christina Bliss BarsnessUniversity of Minnesota, Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Nora GordonUniversity of Minnesota, Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Marna CanterburyHealthPartners, Bloomington, MN, USA.
Hikaru Hanawa PetersonUniversity of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics, St. Paul, MN, USA.
Julian WolfsonUniversity of Minnesota, Division of Biostatistics, Minneapolis, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2032-0875
Rebekah PrattUniversity of Minnesota, Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Minneapolis, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3561-8276

Funding

University of Minnesota Clinical and Translational Science Institute (UMN CTSI)UL1TR002494 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI BLAZAR, BRUCE R, WEISDORF, DANIEL J · 2018 to 2022
$34.9M
A multi-component intervention in the hunger relief network to improve diet among adults experiencing food insecurityR01HL136640 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI CASPI, CAITLIN EICHER · 2017 to 2021
$3.1M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002494NCATS NIH HHS UL1TR002494NHLBI NIH HHS 1R01HL136640NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL136640
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInterventions in food pantry settings have the potential to improve health among clients at risk of diet-related disease. PURPOSE: This study evaluates whether a cluster-randomized, behavioral intervention in food pantries resulted in improved client outcomes.

methodsSixteen Minnesota food pantries were randomized to an intervention (n = 8) or control condition (n = 8). The intervention offered pantries technical assistance to improve healthy food supply and implement behavioral economics strategies to promote healthy food selection. A convenience sample of adult clients were enrolled (paired sample, 158 intervention, 159 control) and followed for 1 year. Additional clients were enrolled at follow-up to assess food selection (follow-up sample, 85 intervention, 102 control). Analysis was limited to data from 11 pantries (5 intervention, 6 control) due to COVID-19. Outcome measures included Healthy Eating Index-2015 (HEI-2015) total and subcomponent scores for 24-hr dietary recalls and client cart selections, and Life's Simple 7 (LS7) total and subcomponent scores. Multilevel mixed-effects models tested whether client outcomes differed by intervention condition.

resultsIn adjusted models, there were no statistically significant differences by intervention condition in HEI-2015 or LS7 scores. Clients in intervention food pantries had improved Refined Grain subcomponent scores (p = .004); clients in control pantries had worsened Saturated Fat subcomponents scores (p = .019) and improved physical activity scores (p = .007).

conclusionsThe intervention did not result in improved diet quality or cardiovascular health as measured by HEI-2015 or LS7. Coordinated efforts across settings are needed to address health risks facing this population.

Indexed as

Food AssistanceAdultDietFood PreferencesFood SupplyHumansResearch DesignBehavioral economicsFood pantriesHealthy Eating IndexIntervention

Identifiers

PMID37857305
PMCPMC10831215

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.