ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Feasibility study of a screening decision tool for allocating adults into food is medicine programs as an effective approach to target clinical and dietary outcomes among rural and urban adults.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07011251 (Development of a User Centered Design Approach for Screening, Referral, and Enrollment in Food as Medicine Among Adults), which is not on this 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.
Development of a User Centered Design Approach for Screening, Referral, and Enrollment in Food as Medicine Among Adults
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Evaluate feasibility (primary), clinical, and cost outcomes (secondary) associated with the use of a screening decision tool for allocating rural and urban adults with hypertension into in a food is medicine (FIM) program. Design: Participants were allocated to receive either medically tailored meals or grocery prescription (Rx), based on a user-centered designed screening decision tool. Medically tailored meals (MTM) provided 5 meals per week for 12 weeks. The grocery Rx program provided $100 each month for 3 months to purchase food consistent with guidelines for hypertension. Feasibility outcomes included engagement, dose, and program acceptability. Semi-structured interviews were completed with a subset of 20 participants to obtain feedback on the program. Baseline and post-intervention clinical measures were obtained from electronic medical records. Cost analyses data were collected for the 3-month program among both types of programs. Setting: Two large hospital systems (one rural, one urban) in Kentucky. Participants: Adults aged 18-64 with hypertension who screened positively for food insecurity and wanted assistance. Results: A total of 159 participants referred were enrolled, and 144 participants completed all measures (complete case rate of 91%). The screening decision tool had a match rate of 94%-97% for grocery Rx and 73%-77% for medically tailored meals. 95% of participants (engagement rate) completed all 12 weeks or 3 months of the FIM intervention. The average net promoter score (i.e., if they would refer the program to a friend) was 9.4 out of 10. There were significant changes in systolic and diastolic blood pressure among rural and urban adults receiving the grocery Rx program. Those receiving the MTM program in urban communities also reported reductions in systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Qualitative findings reported that the FIM programs were associated with high levels of satisfaction, helped ease the burdensome cost of food, and improved various aspects of their health. Conclusions: A screening decision tool is associated with high patient engagement and retention in a FIM program, while also improving blood pressure, dietary intake, and general health status. Clinical trial registration: NCT07011251 on ClinicalTrials.gov.
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.