Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41225499›Full record

Observational studyThe international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity2025

Economic evaluation of the national school food standards across secondary schools in the Midlands, UK (the FUEL study): methodological challenges of undertaking health economics research within non-health settings.

Irina Pokhilenko, Miranda Pallan, Marie Murphy, Peymane Adab, Breanna Morrison, Alice Sitch, Ashley Adamson, Suzanne Bartington, Rhona Duff, Tania Griffin and 8 more

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

18 authors.

Irina PokhilenkoCentre for Economics of Obesity, Department of Applied Health Research, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK. i.pokhilenko@bham.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6390-2851
Miranda PallanDepartment of Applied Health Research, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2868-4892
Marie MurphyDepartment of Applied Health Research, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1177-1890
Peymane AdabDepartment of Applied Health Research, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9087-3945
Breanna MorrisonDepartment of Applied Health Research, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7473-2402
Alice SitchDepartment of Applied Health Research, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7727-4497
Ashley AdamsonPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3735-2846
Suzanne BartingtonDepartment of Applied Health Research, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8179-7618
Rhona DuffDepartment of Applied Health Research, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3214-524X
Tania GriffinDepartment for Health, University of Bath, Bath, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0146-4440
Kiya HurleyDepartment of Applied Health Research, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5084-5410
Emma LancashireDepartment of Applied Health Research, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8601-4400
Louise McLemanDepartment of Applied Health Research, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0329-246X
Sandra PassmoreServices for Education, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7476-7242
Maisie RowlandPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4762-7540
Vahid RavaghiThe School of Dentistry, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3056-3704
Suzanne SpencePopulation Health Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7089-7197
Emma FrewCentre for Economics of Obesity, Department of Applied Health Research, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5462-1158

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research 17/92/39
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEconomic evaluations of complex public health interventions are becoming increasingly important. This presents health economists with challenges of adapting methodologies originally designed for healthcare to other contexts, such as education. This study presents an economic evaluation of the UK School Food Standards (SFS), with a particular focus on the methodological challenges involved.

methodsThe economic evaluation was conducted alongside an observational study comparing the SFS-mandated secondary schools to non-mandated schools in the Midlands (UK). Costs of food provision and SFS implementation were collected directly from schools and supplemented by secondary data on schools' catering expenditure. The outcomes included dietary intake, dental health, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and educational performance, collected from pupils and secondary data. The analysis comprised a micro-costing, cost-consequence, and an exploratory cost-utility analysis, from school and societal perspectives.

resultsData were collected from 36 schools and 2,543 pupils. We found mandated schools spent less on food provision compared to non-mandated schools, and pupils attending mandated schools had marginally better HRQoL, dental health, and slightly worse nutritional intake. Mandated schools performed worse according to the educational outcomes. There were large amounts of missing cost data despite repeated data collection attempts, and the results of the cost-utility analysis were uncertain. DISCUSSION: We found no clear evidence on the cost-effectiveness of the SFS in secondary schools, likely due to substantial variation in implementation and compliance across both mandated and non-mandated schools, as well as multiple challenges, including the COVID-19 pandemic, difficulties in collecting cost data from schools, and the complexity of the study context. This study highlights the challenges of primary cost data collection for evaluating complex interventions and the need to balance data accuracy with the resources required. As economic evaluations of school-based interventions become more common, there is a growing need to refine methods for such evaluations.

Indexed as

Food ServicesSchoolsAdolescentChildCost-Effectiveness AnalysisCOVID-19DietFemaleHumansMaleOral HealthQuality of LifeUnited KingdomCostingEconomic evaluationEducational performanceHealth-related quality of lifeNutritional intakeSchool food

Identifiers

PMID41225499
PMCPMC12613869

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.