Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35565014›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Evaluating Food Packaging Waste in Schools: A Systematic Literature Review.

Jessica Heiges, Danielle L Lee, Laura Vollmer, Kate Wobbekind, Hannah R Thompson, Wendi Gosliner, Kristine A Madsen, Kate O'Neill, Lorrene D Ritchie

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Reducing consumer level food waste through message framing: A systematic review and social marketing interventions.Waste management & research : the journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, ISWA · 2026
    Pooled it
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

9 authors.

Jessica HeigesDepartment of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5077-8326
Danielle L LeeNutrition Policy Institute, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of California, Oakland, CA 94607, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2138-1087
Laura VollmerDivision of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of California Cooperative Extension, Half Moon Bay, CA 94019, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0119-6554
Kate WobbekindStudent Nutrition Services, San Francisco Unified School District, San Francisco, CA 94102, USA.
Hannah R ThompsonSchool of Public Health, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0214-5003
Wendi GoslinerNutrition Policy Institute, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of California, Oakland, CA 94607, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5092-9289
Kristine A MadsenSchool of Public Health, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1880-5363
Kate O'NeillDepartment of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA.
Lorrene D RitchieNutrition Policy Institute, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of California, Oakland, CA 94607, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8038-1821

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Public schools in the U.S. generate about 14,500 tons of municipal solid waste daily, and approximately 42% of that is food packaging generated by school foodservice, contributing significantly to the global packaging waste crisis. This literature review summarizes methods used to evaluate food packaging waste in school foodservice. This review has two objectives: first, to understand which methodologies currently exist to evaluate food packaging waste generation and disposal in school foodservice; and second, to describe the creation of and share a practical standardized instrument to evaluate food packaging waste generation and disposal in school foodservice. A systematic review was conducted using the following search terms: solid waste, school, cafeteria and food packaging, waste, and school. The final review included 24 studies conducted in school environments (kindergarten through twelfth grade or college/university), 16 of which took place in the U.S. Food packaging waste evaluations included objective methods of waste audits, models, and secondary data as well as subjective methods of qualitative observations, questionnaires, interviews, and focus groups. Large variation exists in the settings, participants, designs, and methodologies for evaluating school foodservice packaging waste. Lack of standardization was observed even within each methodology (e.g., waste audit). A new instrument is proposed to support comprehensive and replicable data collection, to further the understanding of school foodservice food packaging waste in the U.S., and to reduce environmental harms.

Indexed as

Food ServicesRefuse DisposalFood PackagingHumansSchoolsSolid WasteSurveys and QuestionnairesSolid Wastedata collection instrumentfood packaging wastemunicipal solid wastemunicipal solid waste methodologiesschool foodservicewaste audits

Identifiers

PMID35565014
PMCPMC9101714

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.