Evidence mapPaperPMID 33866997Full record

SynthesisPublic health nutrition2021

Outcome evaluation of fruits and vegetables distribution interventions in schools: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Mariam R Ismail, Jamie A Seabrook, Jason A Gilliland

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Public health nutrition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

3 authors.

Mariam R IsmailSchool of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
Jamie A SeabrookSchool of Food and Nutritional Sciences, Brescia University College; Department of Pediatrics, Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Western University; Children's Health Research Institute, Lawson Health Research Institute, London, ON, Canada.
Jason A GillilandDepartment of Geography & Environment, School of Health Studies, Department of Pediatrics, Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Western University; Children's Health Research Institute, Lawson Health Research Institute, 1151 Richmond Street, London, ONN6A 3K7, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2909-2178

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveFruits and vegetables (FV) distribution interventions have been implemented as a public health strategy to increase children's intake of FV at school settings. The purpose of this review was to examine whether snack-based FV distribution interventions can improve school-aged children's consumption of FV.

designSystematic review and meta-analysis of articles published in English, in a peer-reviewed journals, were identified by searching six databases up to August 2020. Standardised mean differences (SMD) and 95 % CI were calculated using a random effects model. Heterogeneity was quantified using I2 statistics.

settingPopulation-based studies of interventions where the main focus was the effectiveness of distributed FV as snacks to schoolchildren in North America, Europe and Pacific were included.

resultsForty-seven studies, reporting on fifteen different interventions, were identified; ten studies were included in the meta-analysis. All interventions were effective in increasing children's consumption of FV, with only one intervention demonstrating a null effect. Pooled results under all classifications showed effectiveness in improving children's consumption of FV, particularly for multi-component interventions at post-intervention (SMD 0·20, 95 % CI 0·13, 0·27) and free distribution interventions at follow-up (SMD 0·19, 95 % CI 0·12, 0·27).

conclusionsFindings suggest that FV distribution interventions provide a promising avenue by which children's consumption can be improved. Nonetheless, our results are based on a limited number of studies, and further studies should be performed to confirm these results. More consistent measurement protocols in terms of rigorous study methodologies, intervention duration and follow-up evaluation are needed to improve comparability across studies.

Indexed as

FruitVegetablesChildHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareSchoolsSnacksFruitMeta-analysisSchoolchildrenSnacksSystematic reviewVegetable

Identifiers

PMID33866997
PMCPMC10195380

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.