ArticleJournal of patient-centered research and reviews2026
Mixed Methods Evaluation of a Shipped Medically Tailored Meal Pilot Intervention.
Article in Journal of patient-centered research and reviews, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Medically tailored meal (MTM) programs generally demonstrate meaningful health outcomes for patients. There is a need to evaluate novel MTM delivery methods to understand participant and organizational-level impacts. The objectives of this study were to assess a shipped MTM pilot intervention, including 1) initial and ongoing client reach, 2) effects on clients' health and behaviors, and 3) staff members' perceptions of factors that influence intervention maintenance. Methods: Based on the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance (RE-AIM) framework, the mixed methods design included quantitative data collected from participants and qualitative data collected from MTM provider staff. The pilot took place in San Diego County, California, through one MTM provider. The 12-week pilot intervention included 21 MTMs per week and two virtual nutrition education sessions with a registered dietitian. Initial and ongoing reach measures included enrollment and completion rates, disenrollment rationale, and participant demographics. Measures of effectiveness included dietary patterns, chronic disease management, perceptions of food-related programming, and intervention satisfaction. Factors influencing intervention maintenance were assessed qualitatively. Results: The MTM provider surpassed their goal of enrolling >50 clients, but only 40% completed at least nine weeks of the pilot. There were statistically significant increases in intake of vegetables excluding potatoes and number of meals per day from pre- to post-implementation. Clients perceived that MTMs and food-related programming helped them to achieve or maintain a healthy weight, eat healthier foods, improve their health, and feel better. Interview results with staff showed that some but not all factors leading to sustainability were present. Conclusions: Overall, this evaluation of a pilot MTM program in San Diego County revealed mixed findings in intervention reach, effectiveness, and potential intervention maintenance.
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.