↓ Skip to main content

CAFÉ: a multicomponent audit and feedback intervention to improve implementation of healthy food policy in primary school canteens: a randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
146 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
CAFÉ: a multicomponent audit and feedback intervention to improve implementation of healthy food policy in primary school canteens: a randomised controlled trial
Published in
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12966-016-0453-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sze Lin Yoong, Nicole Nathan, Luke Wolfenden, John Wiggers, Kathryn Reilly, Christopher Oldmeadow, Rebecca Wyse, Rachel Sutherland, Tessa Delaney, Peter Butler, Lisa Janssen, Sarah Preece, Christopher M. Williams

Abstract

The implementation of nutrition policies in schools has been recommended as a strategy to improve child dietary intake. Internationally, research suggests that the majority of schools do not implement these policies. In New South Wales (NSW), Australia, the NSW Healthy School Canteen Policy requires that school canteens prohibit the sale of 'red' foods (i.e. foods that are typically nutrient poor and high in energy, such as confectionary and deep-fried foods) and 'banned'drinks (i.e. soft drinks); and that the majority of items on the menu are 'green' (i.e. foods that are good sources of nutrients, such fruits, vegetables and lean meats). This study examined the impact of a multicomponent audit and feedback intervention on schools' implementation of the NSW Healthy School Canteen Policy. A secondary aim was to assess the impact of the intervention on menu composition. This study was a parallel group randomised controlled trial with 72 rural and remote primary schools (36 interventions, 36 controls) located in one region within NSW, Australia. Intervention schools received an initial face to face contact and up to four cycles of audit and feedback (consisting of a menu audit, written feedback report and telephone feedback) over a 12-month period. The primary trial outcomes were the proportion of schools with a canteen menu that had: i) no 'red' foods or 'banned' drinks; and ii) >50% 'green' items, as assessed via standardised menu audits undertaken by trained dietitians. For each primary outcome, between-group differences were assessed using Fisher's exact test under an intention to treat approach. There was insufficient evidence to conclude the intervention had a positive impact on the proportion of intervention schools with no 'red' or 'banned' items on their menu (RR = 2.8; 95% CI: 0.9 to 8.9; p = 0.0895), or on the proportion of intervention schools with more than 50% 'green' items (RR = 1.5; 95% CI: 0.7 to 3.2; p = 0.2568). These findings remained non-significant in the multiple imputation analyses. Intervention schools were significantly more likely to have a lower percentage of 'red' items (p-value: 0.007) and a higher percentage of 'green' items on the menu (p-value: 0.014). This remained statistically significant in the multiple imputation analyses for 'red items' (p-value: 0.0081) but not for 'green' items (p-value: 0.0910). While there was insufficient statistical evidence to suggest that this multicomponent audit and feedback intervention was effective in improving primary schools' compliance with a healthy canteen policy, the intervention demonstrated some positive impact in reducing the availability of 'red' items on the menu. This trial was prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12613000543785 ). Registered 15th May 2013.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 146 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 2 1%
Unknown 144 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 13%
Researcher 17 12%
Librarian 9 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 38 26%
Unknown 30 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 23%
Social Sciences 12 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 8%
Psychology 9 6%
Unspecified 8 5%
Other 32 22%
Unknown 39 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 June 2019.
All research outputs
#2,284,798
of 15,184,149 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#849
of 1,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,392
of 384,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#67
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,184,149 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,512 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.4. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 384,403 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.