Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior

2014

DOI: 10.1016/j.jneb.2014.04.288

|View full text |Cite

|

Sign up to set email alerts

|

Implementation and Outcome of a Farmers' Market Targeting WIC Farmers' Market Nutrition Program (FMNP) Participants: A Case Study Using CBPR Approach

¹

,

²

,

Kenneth C. Johnston

³

et al.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Results5

Citation Types

Supporting

0

Mentioning

8

Contrasting

0

Year Published

2021

2021

2022

2022

Publication Types

Select...

Article2

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent2

Authors

Journals

Cited by 2 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

0

Mentioning

8

Contrasting

0

Order By: Relevance

“…Of these, two studies included households with children under 2 years of age ( 51 , 54 ). Seven studies included adults ( 41 , 43 , 46 , 49 – 52 ), three included farmers ( 46 , 50 , 52 ), two included women 15–49 years ( 51 ), and mothers ( 41 ). Two studies included rural households and customers without specifying their ages ( 44 , 48 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Using strategies in nutritional interventions were store and shopping programs ( 44 , 47 , 53 ), Fresh Fruit and Vegetable programs ( 45 , 46 ), nutrition education programs for mothers ( 41 ), farmers market nutrition programs ( 46 ), and voucher/food assistance program ( 41 , 45 , 46 ). For example, in the food assistance program, each participating family received 40 dollars in vouchers per month to spend at farmers’ markets ( 45 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A wide variety of techniques were implemented in the interventions, including educational workshops ( 43 , 47 , 51 ), cooking sessions ( 51 ), farmer-to-farmer knowledge-sharing approaches ( 50 ), media campaign ( 44 ), providing fresh fruit and vegetable products ( 46 ), healthy retail strategies through taste-testing, a cooking program to provide quick packs of fruits and vegetables, offering healthy foods at discount prices, and promotional signage ( 53 , 54 ), individual nutrition counseling ( 41 ), casing fruiting technique ( 48 ), improving purchasing environment through fresh stock produce other healthier food options, label and promote healthy items, and maintain store cleanliness and appearance ( 47 ), food vouchers ( 45 ), different agroecological practices, such as making organic compost, stubble mulching, and intercropping ( 49 ), seed distribution ( 52 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All studies were conducted in community settings. Specifically, six (50%) of the research engagement was at the household level ( 43 , 45 , 48 , 49 , 51 ), four (33.3%) at the individual level ( 41 , 46 , 52 ), and one included both household and individual level ( 50 ). Three studies took place in the store setting ( 44 , 47 , 53 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Availability: household production diversity ( 50 ), increasing crop diversity ( 52 ), redemption rate ( 46 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Community-based participatory interventions to improve food security: A systematic review

Doustmohammadian

¹

,

Mohammadi‐Nasrabadi

²

,

Keshavarz-Mohammadi

³

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThis systematic review aimed to evaluate community-based participatory (CBP) interventions to improve food security and/or its dimensions to highlight the scope and characteristics of interventions and extract the characteristics of effective interventions.MethodsThe electronic databases, including PubMed/MEDLINE, SCOPUS, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, were searched from 1980 to 30 August 2022 for relevant studies. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cluster randomized controlled trials (cRCTs), controlled before and after studies (CBAs), non-randomized controlled trials (nRCT), and interrupted time series (ITS) studies to identify the community-based participatory interventions. The indicators of food and nutrition security into four dimensions, as well as food insecurity measured as score and/or prevalence of food insecurity based on validated perception-based measures were considered outcome. Two reviewers independently evaluated the studies for eligibility, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias in the included studies using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP). The quality of included reports was categorized as strong (when there were no weak ratings), moderate (when one factor was rated as weak), or weak (when two or more factors were rated as weak). A descriptive analysis of the findings was performed.ResultsA total of twelve studies were included. The quality of all eligible studies (n = 12) was rated as moderate/weak. Most CBP interventions were guided by formative research (n = 9, 75%). Two main groups for utilized strategies were identified: agricultural and nutrition strategies. Agricultural strategies included agricultural education, preparing and improving soil and seeds, promoting and supporting gardening/harvesting utilizing traditional skills based on the local culture, and agroecological practices. Nutrition strategies included store and shopping programs, farmers’ markets, fresh fruit and vegetable programs, nutrition education programs for mothers, and food vouchers. The main outcomes improved in the CBP interventions were food security (n = 2) and its dimensions, including availability (n = 3), access (n = 5), and utilization (n = 2). All agroecological practices achieved statistically significant outcomes in the intended food security target(s). However, nutritional interventions were not effective for some access components such as mean adequacy ratio, fruit and vegetable intake, and nutrition environment of the stores. No studies evaluated stability outcome components of food security.DiscussionCBP interventions guided by formative research data and agroecological practices were promising strategies to improve food security and its dimensions. Insufficient data on the stability components of food security and weak design studies were the considerable gaps in the research evidence reviewed. More research employing randomized experimental designs with adequate sample size and high retention rates is required.Systematic review registration[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/], identifier [CRD42020189477].

“…Of these, two studies included households with children under 2 years of age ( 51 , 54 ). Seven studies included adults ( 41 , 43 , 46 , 49 – 52 ), three included farmers ( 46 , 50 , 52 ), two included women 15–49 years ( 51 ), and mothers ( 41 ). Two studies included rural households and customers without specifying their ages ( 44 , 48 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Using strategies in nutritional interventions were store and shopping programs ( 44 , 47 , 53 ), Fresh Fruit and Vegetable programs ( 45 , 46 ), nutrition education programs for mothers ( 41 ), farmers market nutrition programs ( 46 ), and voucher/food assistance program ( 41 , 45 , 46 ). For example, in the food assistance program, each participating family received 40 dollars in vouchers per month to spend at farmers’ markets ( 45 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A wide variety of techniques were implemented in the interventions, including educational workshops ( 43 , 47 , 51 ), cooking sessions ( 51 ), farmer-to-farmer knowledge-sharing approaches ( 50 ), media campaign ( 44 ), providing fresh fruit and vegetable products ( 46 ), healthy retail strategies through taste-testing, a cooking program to provide quick packs of fruits and vegetables, offering healthy foods at discount prices, and promotional signage ( 53 , 54 ), individual nutrition counseling ( 41 ), casing fruiting technique ( 48 ), improving purchasing environment through fresh stock produce other healthier food options, label and promote healthy items, and maintain store cleanliness and appearance ( 47 ), food vouchers ( 45 ), different agroecological practices, such as making organic compost, stubble mulching, and intercropping ( 49 ), seed distribution ( 52 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All studies were conducted in community settings. Specifically, six (50%) of the research engagement was at the household level ( 43 , 45 , 48 , 49 , 51 ), four (33.3%) at the individual level ( 41 , 46 , 52 ), and one included both household and individual level ( 50 ). Three studies took place in the store setting ( 44 , 47 , 53 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Availability: household production diversity ( 50 ), increasing crop diversity ( 52 ), redemption rate ( 46 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Community-based participatory interventions to improve food security: A systematic review

Doustmohammadian

¹

,

Mohammadi‐Nasrabadi

²

,

Keshavarz-Mohammadi

³

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThis systematic review aimed to evaluate community-based participatory (CBP) interventions to improve food security and/or its dimensions to highlight the scope and characteristics of interventions and extract the characteristics of effective interventions.MethodsThe electronic databases, including PubMed/MEDLINE, SCOPUS, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, were searched from 1980 to 30 August 2022 for relevant studies. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cluster randomized controlled trials (cRCTs), controlled before and after studies (CBAs), non-randomized controlled trials (nRCT), and interrupted time series (ITS) studies to identify the community-based participatory interventions. The indicators of food and nutrition security into four dimensions, as well as food insecurity measured as score and/or prevalence of food insecurity based on validated perception-based measures were considered outcome. Two reviewers independently evaluated the studies for eligibility, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias in the included studies using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP). The quality of included reports was categorized as strong (when there were no weak ratings), moderate (when one factor was rated as weak), or weak (when two or more factors were rated as weak). A descriptive analysis of the findings was performed.ResultsA total of twelve studies were included. The quality of all eligible studies (n = 12) was rated as moderate/weak. Most CBP interventions were guided by formative research (n = 9, 75%). Two main groups for utilized strategies were identified: agricultural and nutrition strategies. Agricultural strategies included agricultural education, preparing and improving soil and seeds, promoting and supporting gardening/harvesting utilizing traditional skills based on the local culture, and agroecological practices. Nutrition strategies included store and shopping programs, farmers’ markets, fresh fruit and vegetable programs, nutrition education programs for mothers, and food vouchers. The main outcomes improved in the CBP interventions were food security (n = 2) and its dimensions, including availability (n = 3), access (n = 5), and utilization (n = 2). All agroecological practices achieved statistically significant outcomes in the intended food security target(s). However, nutritional interventions were not effective for some access components such as mean adequacy ratio, fruit and vegetable intake, and nutrition environment of the stores. No studies evaluated stability outcome components of food security.DiscussionCBP interventions guided by formative research data and agroecological practices were promising strategies to improve food security and its dimensions. Insufficient data on the stability components of food security and weak design studies were the considerable gaps in the research evidence reviewed. More research employing randomized experimental designs with adequate sample size and high retention rates is required.Systematic review registration[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/], identifier [CRD42020189477].

Mapping the Influence: A Nexus Analysis Approach to Addressing Food Access

¹

2021

Health Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

No abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

customersupport@researchsolutions.com

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

Product

Browser Extension Assistant by scite Citation Statement Search Reference Check Visualizations Dashboards Explore Journals Explore Organizations Explore Funders Embedding Badge Embedding Citation Search Pricing

Resources

Blog Help & FAQ Accessibility Statement API Terms For Universities & Governments For Researchers For Publishers For Corporate, Pharma & Enterprise Author Marketing Become an Affiliate Get an organization trial or quote scite Data & Services

About

News & Press Careers Read our Paper Coverage

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.