Skip to main content

Table 1 Percentage of hot meals containing meat sold per week: baseline and intervention means, and model results testing the effect of the availability intervention, by cafeteria site

From: Impact of increasing the relative availability of meat-free options on food selection: two natural field experiments and an online randomised trial

 

Mean percentage of hot meals sold per week (s.d.)

Model resultsa

Baseline

Intervention

Intervention coefficient (95% CIs)

P value of intervention effect

Intervention site

60.74 (4.57)

39.19 (2.94)

− 19.88 (− 25.17, − 14.60)

< 0.001

Control site 1

57.29 (8.12)

50.04 (5.79)

0.04 (− 5.84, 5.92)

0.672

Control site 2

43.55 (13.16)

56.29 (5.97)

7.35 (− 2.19, 16.90)

0.222

Control site 3

54.97 (6.08)

53.08 (7.41)

−0.21 (−7.92, 7.50)

0.720

Control site 4

52.57 (4.55)

49.07 (7.13)

−2.79 (− 10.27, 4.69)

0.752

Control site 5

50.97 (5.39)

49.07 (6.17)

1.04 (−6.68, 8.76)

0.162

Control site 6

52.23 (8.53)

44.38 (6.06)

−2.45 (−11.13, 6.23)

0.381

Control site 7

57.10 (5.51)

56.89 (7.74)

−2.56 (− 8.40, 3.28)

0.353

Control site 8

49.85 (4.44)

47.81 (5.91)

−1.94 (−9.63, 5.76)

0.372

Control site 9

48.38 (9.68)

44.55 (7.61)

−2.37 (−11.64, 6.91)

0.480

Control site 10

49.61 (5.17)

47.04 (9.14)

−1.60 (− 10.62, 7.42)

0.490

Control site 11

51.59 (10.00)

45.22 (7.45)

−6.03 (−12.35, 0.29)

0.074

  1. a Interrupted time series predicting the percentage of hot meals containing meat purchased per week, depending on the relative availability of meat-free meals (modelled using a dummy variable). A dummy variable indicating whether it was during university term (vs. holidays) was included as a covariate