Table 1 Characteristics of primary studies
Author, year | Intervention description (as described in article, with small edits and summaries for flow of read) | Land | Data collection method | Sample size and target group | Context |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
The Boost intervention consists of five parts: 1) provision of free fruits and vegetables 2) creating a pleasant eating environment 3) class—based curriculum activities 4) inclusion of parents through meetings at school and newsletters 5) information sheets distributed to sports and youth clubs. The intervention lasted for 9 months and was implemented in 2010/2011. (p.2) | Denmark | focus group interviews class observations telephone interviews | 6 schools class observations—no estimate of number of persons observed 111 students (13 years old) 13 teachers 18 suppliers | Community | |
Bateman et al. (2014) [33] | Farm to school programs consist of three parts: 1) local or regional food procurement by schools and preschools 2) nutrition and agricultural education 3) student engagement activity. Fruits and vegetables can be served as snacks, but also as part of a salad bar, or a hot meal at the school. There is variation in how the program is designed and implemented across the United States. (p.49) | USA (Wisconsin) | phone interviews | 10 producers (farmers) 5 distributors | Community |
Bogart et al. (2018) [32] | The SNaX intervention consists of two parts: 1) school wide-food environment changes 2) school wide social marketing. In the context of the first part (environmental changes) sliced and bite sized fruits and vegetables were freely distributed. Students (in the role of 'Student Advocates') and teachers were implementing actors in the school setting. Teachers distributed lists of proposed activities to students, which they could complete at home with their parents. Intervention was implemented in 2014/2015 school year. (p. 725) | USA | interviews focus groups | 16 teachers 16 principals 14 cafeteria managers 154 students | Schools |
Bouck et al. (2011) [30] | The Norther fruit and vegetable pilot program consists of two parts: 1) free distribution of fruits and vegetables 2) more intensive nutrition education. Fruits and vegetables were distributed three times per week, in class. The program was implemented December 2006 to May 2007. (p.15) | Canada (Ontario) | qualitative interviews | 28 stakeholders: -8 principals -10 teachers -8 food preparers -1 local site coordinator -1 Ontario Fruit and Vegetable Growers' Association (OFVGA) representative | Schools |
Carbone et al. (2016) [27] | The particular Farm to Preschool project identifies three parts: 1) activities to establish a system through which preschools can purchase local produce at a lower cost 2) activities to ensure children, staff and families know how to prepare, serve healthy foods, and consume healthy foods 3) activities introducing changes to the early education regulations aiming toward higher nutrition standards, and purchase of locally grown foods. Some of the services offered are: trainings, purchases of products, family field trips, mobile markets and a healthy snack grant. (p.179) | USA (Springfield, Maryland) | classroom observations interviews administrator surveys | (approximately) 44 students observed (age 3–5) (4 observation sessions -one prior to evaluation, 3 during evaluation; estimated that on average 11 students observed per classroom) 4 food service staff members 4 teachers 5 administrators | Preschools |
Chen et al. (2014) [29] | The intervention consists of three parts: 1) recipe development: development of seven food recipes from Hmong, Latino, mainstream American culture with the help of students and parents participating in the intervention 2) classroom component: 20 min in-class monthly tasting activities from February—May 2012, implemented by nutrition educators and teachers 3) family component: after each in-class demonstration and tasting activity, children were given 'food kits' containing recipes and ingredients as well as preparation tools to take home, so as to prepare the meal with their parents. (p.115–116) | USA (Northern California) | focus groups | 28 parents | Schools |
Cirillo et al. (2018) [34] | Although the Farm to School programs included in the study varied, they all entailed the following parts 1) nutrition education in the classroom 2) improvements to the food options in the cafeteria 3) engagement with the local community. One of the most common mentioned actions of the programs was a school garden, and the use of the fruits and vegetables from the garden, for consumption by the children. (p.3) | USA (Vermont) | semi-structured interviews | 10 principals | Schools |
He et al. (2012) [25] | The Norther fruit and vegetable program entails distribution of free fruit and vegetables snacks. Fruit and vegetables were distributed three times per week. The program was piloted in December 2006 to May 2007 and expanded and implemented in 2007/2008 school year. (p. 592) | Canada (Ontario) | focus groups | 139 students | Schools |
Hector et al. (2017) [18] | The intervention provides supplementary, free fruits and vegetables to schools that participate in the Crunch and Sip initiative. The Crunch and Sip initiative encourages teachers to incorporate a 'snack' break during their usual classes, and eat fruits and vegetables together with the children. Although as part of Crunch and Sip, children are asked to bring fruits and vegetables from home, the current intervention supplements free fruits and vegetables for children who have not brought such a snack from home. The intervention was implemented for 10Â weeks, in 2014, and consisted of the distribution of bananas, apples and carrots. (p. 239) | Australia (Western Sydney) | questionnaires | 55 teachers 4 key contacts in participating schools | Schools |
The Boost intervention combined educational and environmental strategies within the school, home and community, such as: curriculum activities, daily free fruit and vegetables at school, parental newsletters and fact sheets for sports and youth clubs. The intervention lasted for 9Â months (September 2010-May 2011). (p. e2) | Denmark | focus groups individual interviews | 22 teachers | Schools | |
Knapp et al. (2019) [28] | A school-based kitchen garden program that consists of a core curriculum, taught by specialized teachers, during school hours, which entails the involvement of students in growing, harvesting, preparing and eating the food from school gardens. In addition, the program aims for family and community involvement through: Family Food Nights, Open Garden Days, and Parent Cooking Classes. (p. 669) | USA (New Orleans, Louisiana) | focus groups | 27 students 17 parents 17 teachers | Schools |
Lee et al. (2019) [35] | The focus of the study is on farm to school programs generally, which are described as involving a range of activities linked to the promotion, procurement, serving of local food—fruits and vegetables and teaching related to nutrition and local food production. (p. 374) | USA (Ohio) | semi structured interviews focus groups | 194 practitioners and community residents 18 experts | Community |
Lin et al. (2016) [17] | The US Department of Agriculture Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, is a federally funded program, where schools are given funds to purchase fresh fruits and vegetables for children, prepare and serve them as snacks, outside of the regular school meals. The program was expanded to all US states in 2008, while in 2010 it was limited to elementary schools only. (p. 321) | USA (Indiana) | questionnaires (open ended item for program comments) | 3811 students | Schools |
Potter et al. (2011) [31] | The Mississippi Fruit and Vegetable Pilot Program consists of distributing free fruits and vegetables to children, as snacks during the school day. The pilot program was implemented in 2004/2005 school year. (p. 203) | USA (Mississippi) | interviews focus groups | 11 program staff 6 administrators 42 students 19 parents | Schools |