Testing a food provision and wastage audit protocol (NUTRI_WASTE_ECEC) in early childhood education settings: An equivalence study.

IF 4.9 1区 农林科学 Q1 FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Audrey Elford , Chris Irwin , Alison Spence , Iasha Aminath , Ashlee Kelly , Penelope Love
{"title":"Testing a food provision and wastage audit protocol (NUTRI_WASTE_ECEC) in early childhood education settings: An equivalence study.","authors":"Audrey Elford ,&nbsp;Chris Irwin ,&nbsp;Alison Spence ,&nbsp;Iasha Aminath ,&nbsp;Ashlee Kelly ,&nbsp;Penelope Love","doi":"10.1016/j.foodqual.2025.105464","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Early Childhood Education and Care settings (ECEC) are important food environments, with young children often receiving approximately half of their daily nutritional needs while in attendance. Previous ECEC research has found poor menu quality and high levels of food waste, which have implications for human and planetary health. A self-administered weighed protocol (NUTRI_WASTE_ECEC) was developed to audit food provision and wastage at both pre-consumption (serving waste) and post-consumption (plate waste) levels. This study examined the accuracy of data collected using the protocol across different administrators. Data was collected within a university food laboratory by a trained researcher and six research assistants (under conditions simulating ECEC settings). Following the NUTRI_WASTE_ECEC protocol, raw and prepared ingredients, and serving and plate waste were weighed and photographed individually. Equivalence testing was used to verify if the mean % difference (and 90 % CI) between the trained researcher and research assistants were within established acceptable margins of variance (± 10 %). Statistical equivalence was observed for weight comparisons of total prepared food served, serving waste and plate waste (all p's &lt; 0.001). For raw ingredients, statistical equivalence was observed for reported weights of most (45 of 54) items (all p's &lt; 0.05). The self-administered NUTRI_WASTE_ECEC protocol is therefore considered to yield equivalent results compared with the trained researcher-administered protocols most commonly used for the measurement of food provision and wastage in the ECEC setting. Future research should focus on user experience, feasibility and utility in different ECEC settings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":322,"journal":{"name":"Food Quality and Preference","volume":"127 ","pages":"Article 105464"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Quality and Preference","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950329325000394","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Early Childhood Education and Care settings (ECEC) are important food environments, with young children often receiving approximately half of their daily nutritional needs while in attendance. Previous ECEC research has found poor menu quality and high levels of food waste, which have implications for human and planetary health. A self-administered weighed protocol (NUTRI_WASTE_ECEC) was developed to audit food provision and wastage at both pre-consumption (serving waste) and post-consumption (plate waste) levels. This study examined the accuracy of data collected using the protocol across different administrators. Data was collected within a university food laboratory by a trained researcher and six research assistants (under conditions simulating ECEC settings). Following the NUTRI_WASTE_ECEC protocol, raw and prepared ingredients, and serving and plate waste were weighed and photographed individually. Equivalence testing was used to verify if the mean % difference (and 90 % CI) between the trained researcher and research assistants were within established acceptable margins of variance (± 10 %). Statistical equivalence was observed for weight comparisons of total prepared food served, serving waste and plate waste (all p's < 0.001). For raw ingredients, statistical equivalence was observed for reported weights of most (45 of 54) items (all p's < 0.05). The self-administered NUTRI_WASTE_ECEC protocol is therefore considered to yield equivalent results compared with the trained researcher-administered protocols most commonly used for the measurement of food provision and wastage in the ECEC setting. Future research should focus on user experience, feasibility and utility in different ECEC settings.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Food Quality and Preference
Food Quality and Preference 工程技术-食品科技
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
15.10%
发文量
263
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: Food Quality and Preference is a journal devoted to sensory, consumer and behavioural research in food and non-food products. It publishes original research, critical reviews, and short communications in sensory and consumer science, and sensometrics. In addition, the journal publishes special invited issues on important timely topics and from relevant conferences. These are aimed at bridging the gap between research and application, bringing together authors and readers in consumer and market research, sensory science, sensometrics and sensory evaluation, nutrition and food choice, as well as food research, product development and sensory quality assurance. Submissions to Food Quality and Preference are limited to papers that include some form of human measurement; papers that are limited to physical/chemical measures or the routine application of sensory, consumer or econometric analysis will not be considered unless they specifically make a novel scientific contribution in line with the journal''s coverage as outlined below.
×
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