ArticleJournal of nutrition education and behavior2025
Participant Preferences to Inform the Development of Theory-Driven, Digitally Delivered Cooking Interventions Using the Behavior Change Wheel.
Article in Journal of nutrition education and behavior, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Predictors of Voucher Redemption in Produce Prescription Programs in a Primarily Low-Income Population With Type 2 Diabetes.Preventing chronic disease · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study is to gather participant preferences to inform the development of digitally delivered cooking interventions using the first 2 stages of the Behavior Change Wheel design process.
designCross-sectional, open-ended questions to solicit preferences for content delivery and program topics. Participants were grouped as low or high cooking agencies, and differences in preferences were evaluated.
settingSurvey administered via the Amazon Mechanical Turk platform.
participantsA total of 465 US residents (aged ≥ 20 years) were included (47.1% low cooking agency and 52.9% high cooking agency). MAIN OUTCOME: Intervention components identified using the Behavior Change Wheel. ANALYSIS: Qualitative conventional content analysis and quantitative between-group t test and chi-square tests of homogeneity.
resultsIntervention components identified were education and training (roasting, knife skills), modeling (using content experts, showcasing accomplishments), restructuring the social environment (group interaction, problem-solving), enablement (recipes, kitchen items, shopping lists, food), and incentivization (incentives, competitions). Some participant suggestions differed by cooking skill level. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: This study provides evidence for components needed to design digitally delivered cooking interventions. Future considerations include exploring differences in content by cooking skill level, alignment of intervention activities with relevant psychosocial theories, and conducting population-specific needs assessments to understand whether target populations are able to access digital interventions.
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.