2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2018.01.022
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of a randomized intervention promoting healthy children's meals on children's ordering and dietary intake in a quick-service restaurant

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

2
24
1
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
2
24
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…While we observed increases in orders of healthier items, the most popular items (such as burgers and pancakes) remained popular at both time points. The consistency in popular items observed here may reflect the habitual patterns of ordering behavior seen in other research in the restaurant setting [ 16 , 27 , 40 , 41 , 42 ]. Habit was cited as one of the most salient factors for ordering decisions at carryout restaurants among low-income African Americans in Baltimore [ 43 ] and as a barrier to using calorie labels on menus [ 44 ], suggesting that ordering behaviors are difficult to change [ 45 ].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 75%
“…While we observed increases in orders of healthier items, the most popular items (such as burgers and pancakes) remained popular at both time points. The consistency in popular items observed here may reflect the habitual patterns of ordering behavior seen in other research in the restaurant setting [ 16 , 27 , 40 , 41 , 42 ]. Habit was cited as one of the most salient factors for ordering decisions at carryout restaurants among low-income African Americans in Baltimore [ 43 ] and as a barrier to using calorie labels on menus [ 44 ], suggesting that ordering behaviors are difficult to change [ 45 ].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 75%
“…The effects were mixed, but the studies also used multiple nudges. Prompting refers to labels, signage, or other elements such as placemats used in Anzman-Frasca et al, 2018 [26], but in this study it did not have any effect on dietary consumption. However, in the study by Kroese et al, 2015 [34], an additional sign did not seem to have any added benefit to healthy choice.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 59%
“…Anzman-Frasca et al, 2018 [26] investigated whether placemats affected children’s meal selection and intake in the US. Fifty-eight families with 4-to-8-year-old children were randomized to return to a quick-service restaurant during an intervention or control period ( n = 28 intervention, 30 control).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When the cost of the intervention was reported, there was evidence that behaviour change could be cost‐effective. However, only eight of the interventions reported either implementation costs or a cost‐effectiveness analysis 6,50,52–56 . Examples of reported implementation costs include $2000 USD per school, 54 $12.50 (plus teacher labour costs) per child, 53 while another intervention cost only $0.03 USD per cafeteria tray 56 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%