Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38404253›Full record

Trial reportPublic health nutrition2024

Evaluation of a long day care intervention targeting the mealtime environment and curriculum to increase children's vegetable intake: a cluster randomised controlled trial using the multiphase optimisation strategy framework.

Samantha Morgillo, Lucinda K Bell, Claire Gardner, Shabnam Kashef, Karen Stafford, Dorota Zarnowiecki, Astrid Am Poelman, Maeva O Cochet-Broch, Brittany J Johnson, Aarti Gulyani and 2 more

Abstract readPragmatic Clinical TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Public health nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

12 authors.

Samantha MorgilloCaring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Bedford Park, SA, Australia.
Lucinda K BellCaring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Bedford Park, SA, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7251-9176
Claire GardnerCaring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Bedford Park, SA, Australia.
Shabnam KashefCaring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Bedford Park, SA, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2350-9665
Karen StaffordNutrition Australia Victorian Division, Carlton, VIC, Australia.
Dorota ZarnowieckiCaring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Bedford Park, SA, Australia.
Astrid Am PoelmanCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Health and Biosecurity, Westmead, NSW, Australia.
Maeva O Cochet-BrochCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Agriculture & Food, North Ryde, NSW, Australia.
Brittany J JohnsonCaring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Bedford Park, SA, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5492-9219
Aarti GulyaniCaring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Bedford Park, SA, Australia.
David N CoxCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Health and Biosecurity, Adelaide, SA, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7625-0098
Rebecca K GolleyCaring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Bedford Park, SA, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine the reach, adoption, implementation and effectiveness of an intervention to increase children's vegetable intake in long day care (LDC).

designA 12-week pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial, informed by the multiphase optimisation strategy (MOST), targeting the mealtime environment and curriculum. Children's vegetable intake and variety was measured at follow-up using a modified Short Food Survey for early childhood education and care and analysed using a two-part mixed model for non-vegetable and vegetable consumers. Outcome measures were based on the RE-AIM framework.

settingAustralian LDC centres.

participantsThirty-nine centres, 120 educators and 719 children at follow-up.

resultsThere was no difference between intervention and waitlist control groups in the likelihood of consuming any vegetables when compared with non-vegetable consumers for intake (OR = 0·70, (95 % CI 0·34-1·43),

conclusionsThe pragmatic self-delivered online intervention positively impacted educator's knowledge and skills and was considered acceptable and feasible. Intervention adaptations, using the MOST cyclic approach, could improve intervention impact on children' vegetable intake.

Indexed as

DietVegetablesAustraliaChildChild, PreschoolCluster AnalysisCurriculumDay Care, MedicalFeeding BehaviorFruitHumansMealsChildrenLong day careMultiphase optimisation strategyRandomised controlled trialVegetable intake

Identifiers

PMID38404253
PMCPMC10966837

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.