Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32173754›Full record

SynthesisAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2020

Farm to School Activities and Student Outcomes: A Systematic Review.

Melissa Pflugh Prescott, Rebecca Cleary, Alessandro Bonanno, Marco Costanigro, Becca B R Jablonski, Abigail B Long

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. System Mapping of Farm-to-School Partnerships to Enhance Student Access to Healthy, Local Foods.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Impacts of farm to school on children's perception of food.Food, nutrition and health (Singapore) · 2025
    Article
  13. Interventions to Strengthen Environmental Sustainability of School Food Systems: Narrative Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Melissa Pflugh PrescottDepartment of Food Science and Human Nutrition, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA.
Rebecca ClearyDepartment of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Alessandro BonannoDepartment of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Marco CostanigroDepartment of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Becca B R JablonskiDepartment of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Abigail B LongDepartment of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Farm to school programs (F2SPs) operate in 42% of school districts and are supported in part through federal and state policies as well as philanthropic funding. Although research evaluating the effects of farm to school-related activities on student outcomes is growing, a systematic review of the results and thus a synthesis of implications for future programming have not occurred. The primary objective of this systematic literature review is to summarize and evaluate studies on student outcomes associated with farm to school-related activities up to 1 September, 2017. Four databases spanning 4 research disciplines were used to identify full-text, English-language studies. Twenty-one studies were reviewed: 7 explicitly investigated F2SPs, and 14 evaluated the impact of school-based interventions that were relevant to activities reported in the 2013 and/or 2015 Farm to School Census. All of the F2SP studies (n = 7) and 85.7% of farm to school-related activity studies (n = 12) were multicomponent, and there was a wide variety of implemented intervention components across the reviewed studies. Results from F2SP and farm to school-related activity studies consistently show positive impacts on food and nutrition-related knowledge; most studies also suggest a positive relation between farm to school-related activities and healthy food selection during school meals, nutrition self-efficacy, and willingness to try fruits and vegetables. The impact of farm to school activities on fruit and vegetable consumption and preferences is unclear. The most common F2SP study limitations were study designs that preclude causal inference, outcome measurement with no reported or limited psychometric testing, lack of long-term outcome evaluation, and challenges related to quantifying intervention implementation. These findings underscore the need for more conclusive evidence on the relation between farm to school-related activities and changes in fruit and vegetable consumption.

Indexed as

CurriculumDiet, HealthyFarmsFood AssistanceSchool Health ServicesStudentsChildFood PreferencesFood SupplyFruitHealth EducationHumansLunchNutritional SciencesSchoolsVegetablesfarm to schoollocal foodsnutrition educationnutrition promotionschool gardensschool nutrition

Identifiers

PMID32173754
PMCPMC7442359

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.