↓ Skip to main content

Efficacy of the Lunch is in the Bag intervention to increase parents’ packing of healthy bag lunches for young children: a cluster-randomized trial in early care and education centers

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, January 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 (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
17 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
130 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
Efficacy of the Lunch is in the Bag intervention to increase parents’ packing of healthy bag lunches for young children: a cluster-randomized trial in early care and education centers
Published in
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12966-015-0326-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cindy Roberts-Gray, Margaret E. Briley, Nalini Ranjit, Courtney E. Byrd-Williams, Sara J. Sweitzer, Shreela V. Sharma, Maria Romo Palafox, Deanna M. Hoelscher

Abstract

Lunches that parents pack for their young children to eat at school or the Early Care and Education (ECE) center fall short of recommended standards. Lunch is in the Bag is a multi-level behavioral nutrition intervention to increase parents' packing of fruit, vegetables, and whole grains in their children's lunches. Designed for implementation in ECE centers, the five-week long intervention is followed three months later with a one-week booster. Efficacy of Lunch is in the Bag was tested in cluster randomized trial. Participants were 633 families from 30 ECE centers (15 intervention, 15 control) across Austin, San Antonio, and Houston, Texas, USA. Primary outcomes were servings of fruit, vegetables, and whole grains observed in the children's parent-packed bag lunches. Servings of refined grains, meats/beans/eggs/nuts, dairy, chips, and sweets also were observed. Data were collected at baseline, post-intervention (6-week follow-up), pre-booster (22-weeks follow-up), and post-booster (28-week follow-up). Time-by-treatment interactions were analyzed separately for each of the food groups using multi-level models to compare changes from baseline. Analyses were adjusted for relevant demographic variables and clustering within centers and parents. The intervention effected increases from baseline to 6-week follow-up in vegetables (0.17 servings, SE = 0.04, P < 0.001) and whole grains (0.30 servings, SE = 0.13, P = 0.018). The increase in whole grains was maintained through the 28-week follow-up (0.34 servings, SE = 0.13, P = 0.009). Fruit averaged more than 1.40 servings with no differences between groups or across time. The intervention prevented increase in sweets (-0.43 servings, SE = 0.11, P < .001, at the 22-week follow-up). Parents persisted, however, in packing small amounts of vegetables (averages of 0.41 to 0.52 servings) and large amounts of sweets and chips (averages of 1.75 to 1.99 servings). The need for and positive effects of the Lunch is in the Bag intervention at ECE centers where parents send bag lunch for their preschool-aged children was confirmed. An important direction for future research is discovery of more options for leveraging the partnership of ECE centers and families to help young children learn to eat and enjoy vegetables and other healthy foods in preference to less healthy choices such as chips and sweets. The Clinical Trials Number is NCT01292434 .

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 130 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 130 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 23 18%
Student > Master 23 18%
Researcher 19 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 25 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 30 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 15%
Psychology 14 11%
Social Sciences 11 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 8%
Other 10 8%
Unknown 35 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 04 September 2018.
All research outputs
#1,137,317
of 19,521,967 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#484
of 1,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,936
of 390,045 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#49
of 169 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,521,967 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,767 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 390,045 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 169 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.