ArticleTranslational behavioral medicine2026
Examining the associations among produce prescription program implementation characteristics and incentive redemption and participant outcomes.
Article in Translational behavioral medicine, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProduce prescription programs (PRx) have the potential to improve participants' fruit and vegetable intake (FVI), and food security (FS), but further information is needed to understand which program characteristics contribute to these participant outcomes. PURPOSE: To explore the associations between PRx design characteristics, incentive redemption, and program-level participant outcomes including FVI, FS, and perceived health.
methodsAn ecological, exploratory study with a quasi-experimental design (one group pre-test post-test) following the exploration, preparation, implementation, sustainment (EPIS) framework was used among Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program (GusNIP)-funded PRxs in the United States. Data were sourced from a GusNIP program operator survey (84% response rate; n = 80), PRx redemption data (n = 77), and an outcomes sample including redemption and participant outcomes data (n = 39 programs). Redemption data included program-level incentive distribution and redemption rates, measured as the dollar amount of incentives redeemed per participant per month. Participant data included changes in FVI (dietary screener questionnaire), FS (USDA household FS survey module), and perceived health (healthy days). Nonparametric and parametric comparisons were examined between program characteristics with program level-redemption rates and changes in aggregated participant-level outcomes.
resultsProgram-level characteristics, design, and implementation features were associated both positively and negatively with redemption data and changes in participant outcomes including FVI, FS, and perceived health. Programs that provide more funds but serve fewer participants, offer transportation assistance, and offer staff training were positively associated with improved aggregated participant outcomes.
conclusionsThis exploratory research identified factors to be considered for promoting favorable program and participant outcomes in GusNIP PRx and similar initiatives.
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.