以学校为本的“PhunkyFoods”食物素养和烹饪技能干预评估在英国进行的一项随机对照试验

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Karen L Vaughan, Milca Vidal, Janet E Cade, Marion M Hetherington, Charlotte E L Evans
{"title":"以学校为本的“PhunkyFoods”食物素养和烹饪技能干预评估在英国进行的一项随机对照试验","authors":"Karen L Vaughan, Milca Vidal, Janet E Cade, Marion M Hetherington, Charlotte E L Evans","doi":"10.1017/S1368980025000552","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We evaluated the impact of an established nutrition education intervention, 'PhunkyFoods' on food literacy, cooking skills and fruit and vegetable intake in primary school aged children.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A pre-registered cluster randomised controlled trial was used; the intervention group received the 'PhunkyFoods' programme and the wait-list control group received the usual school curriculum. Primary outcomes measured were differences in food literacy and cooking skills scores between the intervention and control arms after 12 months adjusted for baseline values.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The trial was undertaken in twenty-six primary schools in North Yorkshire, UK.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>631 children aged 6-9 years participated (intervention <i>n</i> 307, control <i>n</i> 324) through assemblies, classroom activities and after-school clubs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no significant effects of the intervention compared with control on food literacy, cooking skills, vegetable intake or fruit intake. Adjusting for baseline, the Food Literacy Total Score was 1·13 points lower in the intervention group than the control (95 % CI -2·87, 0·62, <i>P</i> = 0·2). The Cooking Skills Total Score was 0·86 lower in the intervention group compared with the control (95 % CI = -5·17, 3·45, <i>P</i> = 0·69). Girls scored 2·8 points higher than boys in cooking skills across the sample (95 % CI = 0·88, 4·82, <i>P</i> < 0·01).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The intervention did not result in improved food literacy or cooking skills, though sex effects on these outcomes were observed. More practical food preparation hours are needed in primary schools to improve the likelihood of an effect on outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":20951,"journal":{"name":"Public Health Nutrition","volume":" ","pages":"e86"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12100561/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of the school-based 'PhunkyFoods' intervention: a cluster randomised controlled trial in the UK.\",\"authors\":\"Karen L Vaughan, Milca Vidal, Janet E Cade, Marion M Hetherington, Charlotte E L Evans\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S1368980025000552\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We evaluated the impact of an established nutrition education intervention, 'PhunkyFoods' on food literacy, cooking skills and fruit and vegetable intake in primary school aged children.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A pre-registered cluster randomised controlled trial was used; the intervention group received the 'PhunkyFoods' programme and the wait-list control group received the usual school curriculum. Primary outcomes measured were differences in food literacy and cooking skills scores between the intervention and control arms after 12 months adjusted for baseline values.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The trial was undertaken in twenty-six primary schools in North Yorkshire, UK.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>631 children aged 6-9 years participated (intervention <i>n</i> 307, control <i>n</i> 324) through assemblies, classroom activities and after-school clubs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no significant effects of the intervention compared with control on food literacy, cooking skills, vegetable intake or fruit intake. Adjusting for baseline, the Food Literacy Total Score was 1·13 points lower in the intervention group than the control (95 % CI -2·87, 0·62, <i>P</i> = 0·2). The Cooking Skills Total Score was 0·86 lower in the intervention group compared with the control (95 % CI = -5·17, 3·45, <i>P</i> = 0·69). Girls scored 2·8 points higher than boys in cooking skills across the sample (95 % CI = 0·88, 4·82, <i>P</i> < 0·01).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The intervention did not result in improved food literacy or cooking skills, though sex effects on these outcomes were observed. More practical food preparation hours are needed in primary schools to improve the likelihood of an effect on outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20951,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Health Nutrition\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e86\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12100561/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Health Nutrition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980025000552\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NUTRITION & DIETETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980025000552","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

摘要

目的:我们评估了一项已建立的营养教育干预措施“PhunkyFoods”对小学学龄儿童食物素养、烹饪技能和水果和蔬菜摄入量的影响。设计:采用预先注册的整群随机对照试验;干预组接受“PhunkyFoods”计划,等候名单对照组接受常规学校课程。测量的主要结果是干预组和对照组在12个月后根据基线值调整的食物素养和烹饪技能得分的差异。环境:试验在英国北约克郡的26所小学进行。研究对象:631名6 - 9岁儿童(干预组307人,对照组324人)通过集会、课堂活动和课外社团等方式参与。结果:与对照组相比,干预对食物素养、烹饪技能、蔬菜摄入量或水果摄入量没有显著影响。调整基线后,干预组的食品素养总分比对照组低1.13分(95% CI -2.87至0.62,p = 0.2)。干预组的烹饪技能总分比对照组低0.86分(95% CI = -5.17 ~ 3.45, p = 0.69)。在整个样本中,女孩的烹饪技能得分比男孩高2.8分(95% CI = 0.88至4.82,p < 0.01)。结论:尽管观察到性别对这些结果的影响,但干预并没有导致食物素养或烹饪技能的提高。小学需要更多实际的食物准备时间,以提高对结果产生影响的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of the school-based 'PhunkyFoods' intervention: a cluster randomised controlled trial in the UK.

Objective: We evaluated the impact of an established nutrition education intervention, 'PhunkyFoods' on food literacy, cooking skills and fruit and vegetable intake in primary school aged children.

Design: A pre-registered cluster randomised controlled trial was used; the intervention group received the 'PhunkyFoods' programme and the wait-list control group received the usual school curriculum. Primary outcomes measured were differences in food literacy and cooking skills scores between the intervention and control arms after 12 months adjusted for baseline values.

Setting: The trial was undertaken in twenty-six primary schools in North Yorkshire, UK.

Participants: 631 children aged 6-9 years participated (intervention n 307, control n 324) through assemblies, classroom activities and after-school clubs.

Results: There were no significant effects of the intervention compared with control on food literacy, cooking skills, vegetable intake or fruit intake. Adjusting for baseline, the Food Literacy Total Score was 1·13 points lower in the intervention group than the control (95 % CI -2·87, 0·62, P = 0·2). The Cooking Skills Total Score was 0·86 lower in the intervention group compared with the control (95 % CI = -5·17, 3·45, P = 0·69). Girls scored 2·8 points higher than boys in cooking skills across the sample (95 % CI = 0·88, 4·82, P < 0·01).

Conclusion: The intervention did not result in improved food literacy or cooking skills, though sex effects on these outcomes were observed. More practical food preparation hours are needed in primary schools to improve the likelihood of an effect on outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信