Equitable Approaches for Public Health Data Collection Among Diverse Populations: Findings from a National Evaluation of Fruit and Vegetable Incentives.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Carmen Byker Shanks, Betty Izumi, Jenna Eastman, Teala W Alvord, Amy L Yaroch
{"title":"Equitable Approaches for Public Health Data Collection Among Diverse Populations: Findings from a National Evaluation of Fruit and Vegetable Incentives.","authors":"Carmen Byker Shanks, Betty Izumi, Jenna Eastman, Teala W Alvord, Amy L Yaroch","doi":"10.1017/S1368980025000084","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Public health approaches for addressing diet-related health in the United States (US) include nutrition incentive (NI) and produce prescription (PPR) projects. These projects, funded through the US Department of Agriculture Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program (GusNIP), aim to support intake of fruits and vegetables through healthy food incentives. Measuring GusNIP impact is vital to assessing the ability of incentives to improve public health nutrition outcomes across populations. Shared measures used across GusNIP projects assess fruit and vegetable intake, food security, demographics, among other variables, through a participant survey. This study explored challenges and opportunities to support evaluation across GusNIP.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This qualitative study used a sociodemographic survey, semi-structured interviews, and focus groups. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize survey data and applied thematic analysis was used to identify patterns in interview and focus group data.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Data collection occurred in the United States virtually using Qualtrics and Zoom, fall 2021 to fall 2022.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>18 GusNIP PPR and NI data collectors, 24 external evaluators, and 11 GusNIP Training, Technical Assistance, Evaluation, and Information Center's (NTAE) staff participated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Opportunities to improve evaluation among GusNIP's participants include tailoring surveys to specific subpopulations, translations, culturally appropriate food examples, avoiding stigmatizing language, using mixed methods, and intentional strategies to enhance representation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>To increase applicability, evaluation tools must reflect the experiences across populations. This study provides insights that can guide future NI and PPR evaluations, helping to more effectively measure and understand outcomes of all communities.</p>","PeriodicalId":20951,"journal":{"name":"Public Health Nutrition","volume":" ","pages":"1-45"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980025000084","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Public health approaches for addressing diet-related health in the United States (US) include nutrition incentive (NI) and produce prescription (PPR) projects. These projects, funded through the US Department of Agriculture Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program (GusNIP), aim to support intake of fruits and vegetables through healthy food incentives. Measuring GusNIP impact is vital to assessing the ability of incentives to improve public health nutrition outcomes across populations. Shared measures used across GusNIP projects assess fruit and vegetable intake, food security, demographics, among other variables, through a participant survey. This study explored challenges and opportunities to support evaluation across GusNIP.

Design: This qualitative study used a sociodemographic survey, semi-structured interviews, and focus groups. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize survey data and applied thematic analysis was used to identify patterns in interview and focus group data.

Setting: Data collection occurred in the United States virtually using Qualtrics and Zoom, fall 2021 to fall 2022.

Participants: 18 GusNIP PPR and NI data collectors, 24 external evaluators, and 11 GusNIP Training, Technical Assistance, Evaluation, and Information Center's (NTAE) staff participated.

Results: Opportunities to improve evaluation among GusNIP's participants include tailoring surveys to specific subpopulations, translations, culturally appropriate food examples, avoiding stigmatizing language, using mixed methods, and intentional strategies to enhance representation.

Conclusion: To increase applicability, evaluation tools must reflect the experiences across populations. This study provides insights that can guide future NI and PPR evaluations, helping to more effectively measure and understand outcomes of all communities.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Public Health Nutrition
Public Health Nutrition 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
6.20%
发文量
521
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Public Health Nutrition provides an international peer-reviewed forum for the publication and dissemination of research and scholarship aimed at understanding the causes of, and approaches and solutions to nutrition-related public health achievements, situations and problems around the world. The journal publishes original and commissioned articles, commentaries and discussion papers for debate. The journal is of interest to epidemiologists and health promotion specialists interested in the role of nutrition in disease prevention; academics and those involved in fieldwork and the application of research to identify practical solutions to important public health problems.
×
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