ReviewJournal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association2025
Consolidating the evidence on the effectiveness of strategies to promote vegetable intake in priority settings: An overview of systematic reviews.
Review in Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feasibility of a co-designed and personalised intervention to improve vegetable intake in rural-dwelling young adults.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2025Trial
- Consolidating the evidence on the effectiveness of strategies to promote vegetable intake in priority settings: An overview of systematic reviews.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEffective interventions to increase vegetable intake are urgently needed. This systematic rapid review aimed to summarise the effectiveness of interventions targeting increased vegetable intakes across diverse settings. METHODOLOGY: The review was guided by the conduct of rapid reviews from the Cochrane Handbook. The literature was searched in February 2024 across PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Central for systematic review articles published since 2014. The Risk of Bias In Systematic Reviews tool was used and characteristics of reviews synthesised narratively with intervention effectiveness results were summarised.
resultsA total of 20 systematic reviews met the eligibility criteria. Most targeted school-based settings (n = 7) or community/home-based settings (n = 4). Early childhood education and workplaces had one review each, with none in retail, secondary or tertiary education, food service, food relief or aged care. The mean change in vegetable consumption was +0.12 serves per day, with increases of up to +0.42 serves reported (range -0.09 to +0.42). By setting, the largest increases were reported for interventions in school settings (+0.42 serves/day), followed by home (+0.38 serves/day). Almost half the studies reporting effect sizes suggested no effect on intake (46%), 41% suggested a small effect and 13% suggested a medium effect. Greater effect sizes were achieved in interventions implemented across multiple settings.
conclusionsReview findings indicate that the average increase in vegetable intake following interventions is about one-eighth of a serve but up to almost half a serve in some settings. An increase of this magnitude could have a substantial population impact, particularly in population groups with persistently low intakes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.