↓ Skip to main content

Impact of reducing portion sizes in worksite cafeterias: a stepped wedge randomised controlled pilot trial

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
71 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Impact of reducing portion sizes in worksite cafeterias: a stepped wedge randomised controlled pilot trial
Published in
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12966-018-0705-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gareth J. Hollands, Emma Cartwright, Mark Pilling, Rachel Pechey, Milica Vasiljevic, Susan A. Jebb, Theresa M. Marteau

Abstract

Reducing the portion sizes of foods available in restaurants and cafeterias is one promising approach to reducing energy intake, but there is little evidence of its impact from randomised studies in field settings. This study aims to i. examine the feasibility and acceptability, and ii. estimate the impact on energy purchased, of reducing portion sizes in worksite cafeterias. Nine worksites in England were recruited to reduce by at least 10% the portion sizes of foods available in their cafeterias from targeted categories (main meals, sides, desserts, cakes). In a stepped wedge randomised controlled pilot trial, each site was randomised to a date of implementation, staggered fortnightly, following a baseline period of four weeks. Impact on energy purchased was analysed using generalised linear mixed modelling. We also assessed feasibility, acceptability, and fidelity of intervention implementation. Data from six of the nine randomised sites were analysed, with three sites excluded for not providing sufficient data and/or not implementing the intervention. The extent to which the intervention was implemented varied by site, with between 6 and 49% of products altered within targeted categories. Feedback following the intervention suggested it was broadly acceptable to customers and cafeteria staff. For the primary outcome of daily energy (kcal) purchased from intervention categories, there was no statistically significant change when data from all six sites were pooled: percentage change - 8.9% (95% CI: -16.7, - 0.4; p = 0.081). Each of these six sites showed reductions in energy purchased, ranging from - 15.6 to - 0.3%, which were borderline statistically significant at two sites (respective percentage changes (95% CIs): - 15.6% (- 26.7, - 2.8); - 14.0% (- 25.0, - 1.2)). Secondary outcome data are suggestive of a compensatory increase in energy purchased from food categories not targeted by the intervention, with no overall effect observed on energy purchased across all categories. The results of this pilot trial suggest that reducing portion sizes could be effective in reducing energy purchased and consumed from targeted food categories, and merits investigation in a larger trial. Future studies will need to address factors that prevented optimal implementation including site dropout and application across a limited range of products. ( ISRCTN52923504 ). Registered on 20th September 2016.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 71 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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 22%
Student > Bachelor 8 20%
Unspecified 7 17%
Student > Master 6 15%
Researcher 3 7%
Other 8 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 12 29%
Psychology 10 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Other 7 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 56. 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 31 August 2019.
All research outputs
#321,646
of 13,755,876 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#112
of 1,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,548
of 223,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,755,876 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,390 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
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 223,261 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them