ArticlePreventive medicine2024
A produce prescription program for patients with low incomes in North Carolina resulted in increased produce purchases.
Article in Preventive medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo assess if participation in a North Carolina produce prescription program for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participants with diet-sensitive health conditions (SuperSNAP) is associated with changes in purchase composition and spending source.
methodsThis study used loyalty-card transaction data (October 2019-April 2022). We applied a linear mixed-effects model with overlap weights to perform a difference-indifferences analysis of purchases by SuperSNAP program enrollees compared to the control group.
resultsThe sample included 1440 SuperSNAP shoppers and 45,851 control shoppers. Compared to shoppers only on SNAP, SuperSNAP shoppers spent $82.98 (95% CI (75.6, 90.3), p-value <0.001) more per month, $76.09 (95% CI (69.4, 82.8), pvalue <0.001) of which were spent strictly on food and beverage products. Among SuperSNAP shoppers, out of the $40 SuperSNAP benefit each month, an estimated $34.86 (95% CI (33.9, 35.8), p-value <0.001) of it was spent on fruits and vegetables.
conclusionsThis study shows the promise of targeted produce prescription programs for SNAP participants in encouraging shifts in purchase composition.
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.