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。
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.
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.