ArticleBMC public health2025
Food uniting neighbours (f.u.n.): a pilot study exploring the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary impact of co-designed interventions to improve food access.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Co-designing interventions to increase food access: perceptions and experiences of community member end-users.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFood insecurity remains a critical issue in Canada, with 15.6% of households affected. Food access, an important component of food security, reflects the ability of individuals to secure food. This pilot study aimed to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary impact of five co-designed interventions designed to improve nutritious food access in the Onward Willow neighbourhood of Guelph, ON.
methodsThirteen Community Advisors worked with University of Guelph researchers and used co-design to develop, implement, and pilot test five interventions to improve food access: community cafés, food skills workshops, grocery gift cards, gardening materials and workshops, and transportation support. The interventions were pilot tested with 159 community members, and feasibility and acceptability were assessed through surveys and interviews. Preliminary impact was assessed through quantitative pre-post or post-only Likert-scale survey measures.
resultsFindings show that the interventions were feasible and acceptable as all interventions were implemented per protocol and participant satisfaction was high across all interventions. Post-only evaluations identified that participants perceived that the community cafés helped to increase community connection and that the transportation support made it easier to have healthy foods available in their home. Pre-post evaluations revealed that the food skills workshops improved participants' sense of community with a medium effect size (median = 4.12 [IQR 3.87-4.47] to 4.12 [IQR 3.91-4.87], p = .04, r = .33) and that the gardening materials and workshops resulted in increased fruit and vegetable availability with a large effect size (median = 3.00 [IQR 2.00-3.00] to 4.00 [IQR 3.00 to 4.00], p = .04, r = .78). Grocery gift cards did not result in any significant changes in food access outcomes.
conclusionsInterventions that directly engage communities in creating solutions can be feasible, acceptable, and potentially effective. Future research is needed to explore long-term impacts of these interventions on diet quality and broader health outcomes.
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.