ArticleNutrients2024
Opportunities and Challenges of California's Fruit and Vegetable Electronic Benefit Transfer Pilot Project at Farmers' Markets: A Qualitative Study with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Shoppers and Farmers' Market Staff.
Article in Nutrients, 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
BACKGROUND/
objectivesNutrition incentive programs can increase access to fresh fruits and vegetables and improve food security among Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participants and others in the United States. This qualitative study explored SNAP participants' and farmers' market staff's perceptions of and experiences with a pilot supplemental benefit program offered at seven farmers' markets in 2023 as part of the California Fruit and Vegetable Electronic Benefit Transfer Pilot Project. The pilot introduced specific characteristics that differ from more traditional nutrition incentive program dollar-for-dollar match incentive models, particularly the traditional model operating in California. Specific differences included the following: (1) offering a monthly USD 60 supplemental benefit that could be redeemed in a single shopping trip; (2) providing the supplemental benefit as a match that could be spent on any SNAP-eligible item in any retail location (rather than solely on fruits and vegetables at the farmers' market).
methodsWe conducted a qualitative, cross-sectional study including seven focus groups with 40 SNAP shoppers and six focus groups with 14 farmers' market staff at six pilot-participating farmers' markets in California. All focus groups were conducted by trained research staff and were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using the immersion crystallization method.
resultsOur findings include that shoppers appreciated several features of the pilot, particularly the ability to obtain an entire month's supplemental benefit during one shopping trip and the ability to spend the benefit earned on any SNAP-eligible item at any SNAP retailer. Farmers' market staff appreciated that the pilot benefited shoppers but found it difficult to manage due to staff and shopper confusion about the program, increased program utilization, subsequent long lines, and the spending of the earned incentives at other SNAP retailers. Both shoppers and staff reported that the program was difficult to understand.
conclusionsThese findings can inform future nutrition incentive program designs to benefit SNAP participants while offering sustainable models for farmers' markets.
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.