Dataset Information

The introduction of new food retail opportunities in lower-income communities and the impact on fruit and vegetable intake: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT: A lack of access to fresh fruits and vegetables (F&Vs) is associated with consumption of fewer F&Vs and higher risk of obesity, especially for lower-income individuals. It is widely believed that the addition of new food retail opportunities could improve F&V consumption and subsequently reduce the chronic disease burden. Observational studies provide some support for these hypotheses, but contradictions exist. In this study we sought to examine if the introduction of a food retailer affects F&V consumption in lower-income communities. We used a systematic PRISMA approach to conduct this study. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses for academic journal references and gray literature published before August 2018. Included studies were those looking at the effect of the introduction of a new food retailer on F&V consumption. Studies were also categorized based on which dimensions of food access were targeted by the food retailer. We identified 15 studies meeting inclusion criteria: 11 studies reported a positive increase in F&V consumption attributable to the introduction of a new food retailer, of which 6 were statistically significant. The remaining 4 studies, all of which examined the impact of introducing a new retail supermarket, showed no change or a decrease in F&V intake. Results from studies which change the food environment generally support the idea that increased access to healthy food improves diet, but more studies are needed in order to assess the differences between the various types of retailers, and to identify strategies for improving impact. Understanding which types of new food retail programs are most likely to impact diet has implications for policies which incentivize new food retail.

SUBMITTER: Hollis-Hansen K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8679116 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Poorer diets and subsequent higher rates of chronic disease among lower-income individuals may be partially attributed to reduced access to fresh fruits and vegetables (F&V) and other healthy foods. Mobile markets are an increasingly popular method for providing access to F&V in underserved communities, but evaluation efforts are limited. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of Veggie Van (VV), a mobile produce market, on F&V intake in lower-income communities using a group randomized controlled trial. METHODS:VV is a mobile produce market that sells reduced-cost locally grown produce and offers nutrition and cooking education. We recruited 12 sites in lower-income communities in North Carolina (USA) to host VV, randomizing them to receive VV immediately (intervention) or after the 6-month study period (delayed intervention control). Participants at each site completed baseline and follow-up surveys including F&V intake, perceived access to fresh F&V and self-efficacy for purchasing, preparing and eating F&V. We used multiple linear regression to calculate adjusted differences in outcomes while controlling for baseline values, education and clustering within site. RESULTS:Among 142 participants who completed the follow-up, baseline F&V intake was 3.48 cups/day for control and 3.33 for intervention. At follow-up, adjusted change in F&V consumption was 0.95 cups/day greater for intervention participants (p?=?0.005), but was attenuated to 0.51 cups per day (p?=?0.11) after removing extreme values. VV customers increased their F&V consumption by 0.41 cups/day (n?=?30) compared to a 0.25 cups/day decrease for 111 non-customers (p?=?0.04). Intervention participants did not show significant improvements in perceived access to fresh F&V, but increased their self-efficacy for working more F&V into snacks (p?=?0.02), making up a vegetable dish with what they had on hand (p?=?0.03), and cooking vegetables in a way that is appealing to their family (p?=?0.048). CONCLUSIONS:Mobile markets may help improve F&V intake in lower-income communities. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Clinicaltrials.gov ID# NCT03026608 retrospectively registered January 2, 2017.

Project description:Outside of western countries, the study of the local food environment and evidence for its association with dietary behavior is limited. The aim of this paper was to examine the association between the local retail food environment and consumption of fruit and vegetables (FV) among adults in Hong Kong. Local retail food environment was measured by density of different types of retail food outlets (grocery stores, convenience stores, and fast food restaurants) within a 1000 m Euclidean buffer around individual's homes using a geographic information system (GIS). The Retail Food Environment Index (RFEI) was calculated based on the relative density of fast-food restaurants and convenience stores to grocery stores. Logistic regressions were performed to examine associations using cross-sectional data of 1977 adults (18 years or older). Overall, people living in an area with the highest RFEI (Q4, >5.76) had significantly greater odds of infrequent FV consumption (<7 days/week) after covariates adjustment (infrequent fruit consumption: OR = 1.36, 95% CI 1.04?1.78; infrequent vegetable consumption: OR = 1.72, 95% CI 1.11?2.68) in comparison to the lowest RFEI (Q1, <2.25). Highest density of fast food restaurants (Q4, >53) was also significantly associated with greater odds of infrequent fruit consumption (<7 days/week) (unadjusted model: OR = 1.34, 95% CI 1.04?1.73), relative to lowest density of fast food restaurants (Q1, <13). No significant association of density of grocery stores or convenience stores was observed with infrequent FV consumption regardless of the covariates included in the model. Our results suggest that the ratio of fast-food restaurants and convenience stores to grocery stores near people's home is an important environmental factor in meeting fruit and vegetable consumption guidelines. "Food swamps" (areas with an abundance of unhealthy foods) rather than "food deserts" (areas where there is limited access to healthy foods) seems to be more of a problem in Hong Kong's urban areas. We advanced international literature by providing evidence in a non-western setting.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Fruit and vegetable (F&V) intake can reduce risks for chronic disease, but is much lower than recommended amounts in most Western populations, especially for those with low income levels. Rigorous research is needed on practical, cost-effective interventions that address environmental as well as personal determinants of F&V intake. This paper presents the results of a cluster randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of 'Live Well, Viva Bien' (LWVB), a multicomponent intervention that included discount, mobile fresh F&V markets in conjunction with nutrition education. METHODS:Fifteen subsidized housing sites in Providence County, Rhode Island (8 intervention and 7 control sites) were randomized using a random number generator. Of these, nine housed elderly and/or disabled residents and six housed families. A total of 1597 adult housing site residents (treatment n = 837; control n = 760) were enrolled (73% women, 54% Hispanic, 17% black, Mean age 54 years). A year-long multicomponent intervention including mobile F&V markets plus nutrition education (e.g. campaigns, DVDs, newsletters, recipes, and chef demonstrations) was implemented at intervention sites. Physical activity and stress interventions were implemented at control sites. Follow-up occurred at 6 and 12 months. The main outcome measure was F&V consumption measured by National Cancer Institute's 'Eating at America's Table All Day Screener'. RESULTS:From baseline to 12 months, the intervention group increased total F&V intake by 0.44 cups with the control group decreasing intake by 0.08 cups (p < .02). Results also showed an increased frequency of F&V eating behaviors compared to the control group (p < .01). There was a clear dose response effect of the F&V markets with participants who reported attending all or most of the markets increasing F&V intake by 2.1 cups and 0.86 cups, respectively compared with less than half cup increases for lower levels of market attendance (p < .05). Use of the DVDs, recipes and taste-testings was also associated with greater increases in F&V intake; however, use of other educational components was not. CONCLUSIONS:LWVB is the first cluster, randomized controlled trial to demonstrate the efficacy of year-round F&V markets on improving F&V intake for low-income adults, which provides an evidence-base to bolster the mission of mobile produce markets. Further, the results more broadly support investment in environmental changes to alleviate disparities in F&V consumption and diet-related health inequities. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:Clinicatrials.gov registration number: NCT02669472.

Project description:BackgroundDiverse nudges, also known as choice architectural techniques, have been found to increase fruit and vegetable (FV) selection in both lab and field studies. Such strategies are unlikely to be adopted in mass eating settings without clear evidence of customer support; confirmation in specific contexts is needed. Inspired by the Taxonomy of Choice Architecture, we assessed support for eight types of nudging to increase the choice of FV-rich foods in a university food service. We also explored whether and to what extent nudge support was associated with perceived effectiveness and intrusiveness.MethodsAn online survey was conducted with students who used on-campus cafeterias. Multiple recruitment methods were used. Participants were given 20 specific scenarios for increasing FV selection and asked about their personal support for each nudge, as well as perceived intrusiveness and effectiveness. General beliefs about healthy eating and nudging were also measured. Results were assessed by repeated measures ANOVA for the 8 nudge types.ResultsAll nudge scenarios achieved overall favourable ratings, with significant differences among different types of nudging by the 298 respondents. Changing range of options (type B3) and changing option-related consequences (type B4) received the highest support, followed by changing option-related effort (type B2) and making information visible (type A2). Translating information (type A1), changing defaults (type B1) and providing reminders or facilitating commitment (type C) were less popular types of nudging. Providing social reference points (type A3) was least supported. Support for nudge types was positively associated with the belief that food services have a role in promoting healthy eating, perceived importance of FV intake, trustworthiness of the choice architect and female gender. Lastly, support for all types of nudges was positively predicted by perceived effectiveness of each nudge and negatively predicted by perceived intrusiveness above and beyond the contribution of general beliefs about healthy eating and nudging.ConclusionsFindings from the current study indicate significant differences in support for nudge techniques intended to increase FV selection among university cafeteria users. These findings offer practical implications for food service operators as well as public health researchers.

Project description:ImportanceFruit and vegetable vouchers have been implemented by cities and counties across the US to increase fruit and vegetable intake and thereby improve overall nutritional quality.ObjectiveTo determine whether and why use of fruit and vegetable vouchers are associated with varied nutritional intake across different populations and environments.Design, setting, and participantsIn a population-based pre-post cohort study of 671 adult participants with low income before and during (6 months after initiation) participation in a 6-month program, fruit and vegetable vouchers were distributed for redemption at local San Francisco and Los Angeles neighborhood grocery and corner stores between 2017 and 2019. A transportability analysis was performed to identify factors that may explain variation in voucher use between cities.ExposureReceipt of $20 per month in produce vouchers for 6 months from 2017 to 2019.Main outcomes and measuresChange in total fruits and vegetables (as defined by the US Department of Agriculture) consumed per person per day (change in cup-equivalents between month 6 and month 0).ResultsA total of 671 adults (median age, 54.9 years [interquartile range, 45.0-65.0 years]; 61.7% female; 30.9% Black; 19.7% Hispanic) were enrolled. An increase in fruit and vegetable intake of 0.22 cup-equivalents per day overall (95% CI, 0.14-0.31 cup-equivalents; P < .001) was observed. However, the observed increase was larger in Los Angeles compared with San Francisco (0.64 cup-equivalents per day; 95% CI, 0.41-0.88 cup-equivalents vs 0.10 cup-equivalents per day; 95% CI, 0.01-0.19 cup-equivalents). When the concurrently sampled San Francisco group (n = 157) was weighted in transportability analysis to demographically match the Los Angeles group (n = 155) in observed covariates, the weighted San Francisco group had an estimated increase of 0.53 fruit and vegetable cup-equivalents per day (95% CI, 0.27- 0.79 cup-equivalents, P = .03), with income being the variable needed to allow the 95% confidence intervals to overlap between the weighted San Francisco and unweighted Los Angeles populations.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, the use of fruit and vegetable vouchers appeared to be associated with greater benefit among those with lower incomes, suggesting that further investigation of flat-rate rather than income-scaled benefits is warranted.

Dataset Information

The introduction of new food retail opportunities in lower-income communities and the impact on fruit and vegetable intake: a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets