Consolidating the evidence on the effectiveness of strategies to promote vegetable intake in priority settings: An overview of systematic reviews

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q3 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Paige G. Brooker, Astrid A. M. Poelman, Katherine M. Livingstone, Clare E. Collins, Seema Mihrshahi, Ros Sambell, Jason H. Y. Wu, Gilly A. Hendrie
{"title":"Consolidating the evidence on the effectiveness of strategies to promote vegetable intake in priority settings: An overview of systematic reviews","authors":"Paige G. Brooker,&nbsp;Astrid A. M. Poelman,&nbsp;Katherine M. Livingstone,&nbsp;Clare E. Collins,&nbsp;Seema Mihrshahi,&nbsp;Ros Sambell,&nbsp;Jason H. Y. Wu,&nbsp;Gilly A. Hendrie","doi":"10.1111/jhn.13398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Effective interventions to increase vegetable intake are urgently needed. This systematic rapid review aimed to summarise the effectiveness of interventions targeting increased vegetable intakes across diverse settings.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methodology</h3>\n \n <p>The review was guided by the conduct of rapid reviews from the Cochrane Handbook. The literature was searched in February 2024 across PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Central for systematic review articles published since 2014. The Risk of Bias In Systematic Reviews tool was used and characteristics of reviews synthesised narratively with intervention effectiveness results were summarised.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 20 systematic reviews met the eligibility criteria. Most targeted school-based settings (<i>n</i> = 7) or community/home-based settings (<i>n</i> = 4). Early childhood education and workplaces had one review each, with none in retail, secondary or tertiary education, food service, food relief or aged care. The mean change in vegetable consumption was +0.12 serves per day, with increases of up to +0.42 serves reported (range −0.09 to +0.42). By setting, the largest increases were reported for interventions in school settings (+0.42 serves/day), followed by home (+0.38 serves/day). Almost half the studies reporting effect sizes suggested no effect on intake (46%), 41% suggested a small effect and 13% suggested a medium effect. Greater effect sizes were achieved in interventions implemented across multiple settings.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Review findings indicate that the average increase in vegetable intake following interventions is about one-eighth of a serve but up to almost half a serve in some settings. An increase of this magnitude could have a substantial population impact, particularly in population groups with persistently low intakes.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":54803,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jhn.13398","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jhn.13398","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Effective interventions to increase vegetable intake are urgently needed. This systematic rapid review aimed to summarise the effectiveness of interventions targeting increased vegetable intakes across diverse settings.

Methodology

The review was guided by the conduct of rapid reviews from the Cochrane Handbook. The literature was searched in February 2024 across PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Central for systematic review articles published since 2014. The Risk of Bias In Systematic Reviews tool was used and characteristics of reviews synthesised narratively with intervention effectiveness results were summarised.

Results

A total of 20 systematic reviews met the eligibility criteria. Most targeted school-based settings (n = 7) or community/home-based settings (n = 4). Early childhood education and workplaces had one review each, with none in retail, secondary or tertiary education, food service, food relief or aged care. The mean change in vegetable consumption was +0.12 serves per day, with increases of up to +0.42 serves reported (range −0.09 to +0.42). By setting, the largest increases were reported for interventions in school settings (+0.42 serves/day), followed by home (+0.38 serves/day). Almost half the studies reporting effect sizes suggested no effect on intake (46%), 41% suggested a small effect and 13% suggested a medium effect. Greater effect sizes were achieved in interventions implemented across multiple settings.

Conclusions

Review findings indicate that the average increase in vegetable intake following interventions is about one-eighth of a serve but up to almost half a serve in some settings. An increase of this magnitude could have a substantial population impact, particularly in population groups with persistently low intakes.

Abstract Image

整合优先环境下促进蔬菜摄入量策略有效性的证据:系统回顾综述。
背景:增加蔬菜摄入量的有效干预措施迫在眉睫。本系统性快速综述旨在总结不同环境下以增加蔬菜摄入量为目标的干预措施的有效性:本综述以 Cochrane 手册中的快速综述为指导。2024 年 2 月,在 PubMed、Web of Science 和 Cochrane Central 上检索了 2014 年以来发表的系统综述文章。使用了 "系统性综述中的偏倚风险 "工具,并总结了以叙事方式综合干预效果结果的综述特征:共有 20 篇系统综述符合资格标准。大多数综述针对的是以学校为基础的环境(7 篇)或以社区/家庭为基础的环境(4 篇)。幼儿教育和工作场所各有一篇综述,零售、中等或高等教育、餐饮服务、食品救济或老年护理领域没有综述。蔬菜消费量的平均变化为每天+0.12份,据报道最多增加了+0.42份(范围为-0.09至+0.42)。从环境来看,在学校环境中采取干预措施的增幅最大(+0.42 份/天),其次是家庭(+0.38 份/天)。在报告效果大小的研究中,几乎有一半认为对摄入量没有影响(46%),41%认为影响较小,13%认为影响中等。在多种环境下实施的干预措施取得的效果更大:综述结果表明,采取干预措施后,蔬菜摄入量平均增加约八分之一份,但在某些情况下,蔬菜摄入量几乎增加了一半。这种幅度的增加可能会对人口产生重大影响,特别是在摄入量持续偏低的人群中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
15.20%
发文量
133
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics is an international peer-reviewed journal publishing papers in applied nutrition and dietetics. Papers are therefore welcomed on: - Clinical nutrition and the practice of therapeutic dietetics - Clinical and professional guidelines - Public health nutrition and nutritional epidemiology - Dietary surveys and dietary assessment methodology - Health promotion and intervention studies and their effectiveness - Obesity, weight control and body composition - Research on psychological determinants of healthy and unhealthy eating behaviour. Focus can for example be on attitudes, brain correlates of food reward processing, social influences, impulsivity, cognitive control, cognitive processes, dieting, psychological treatments. - Appetite, Food intake and nutritional status - Nutrigenomics and molecular nutrition - The journal does not publish animal research The journal is published in an online-only format. No printed issue of this title will be produced but authors will still be able to order offprints of their own articles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信