Improved food literacy among schoolchildren as an effect of a food camp intervention: Results of a controlled effectiveness trial

A critical review of children's culinary nutrition interventions, the methodologies used and their impact on dietary, psychosocial and wellbeing outcomes

“…A high‐level overview of the characteristics and key components of interest of the 38 studies can be found in Table 2. The majority of studies ( n = 25) were conducted in North America (Adedokun et al, 2020; Auld et al, 1998; Bisset et al, 2008; Chen et al, 2014; Cullen et al, 2007; Cunningham‐Sabo & Lohse, 2013, 2014; DeJesus et al, 2019; Ehrenberg et al, 2019; Gutschall & Settle, 2013; Harley et al, 2018; Harmon et al, 2015; Heerman et al, 2021; Isoldi & Dolar, 2016, 2020; Isoldi et al, 2014; Jacob et al, 2019; Jarpe‐Ratner et al, 2016; Liquori et al, 1998; Moore et al, 2020; Overcash et al, 2018; Quinn et al, 2003; Saha et al, 2020; Saxe‐Custack et al, 2021; Zahr & Sibeko, 2017), followed by 10 conducted in Europe (Al Ali et al, 2020; Allirot et al, 2016; Battjes‐Fries et al, 2017; Caraher et al, 2013; Dean et al, 2022; Elsborg et al, 2022; Ensaff et al, 2017; Højer et al, 2021; Maiz et al, 2021; Van der Horst et al, 2014), two in Asia (Bai et al, 2018; Yoshii et al, 2021) and one in Australia (Ritchie et al, 2015). The publication dates ranged from 1998 (Auld et al, 1998; Liquori et al, 1998) to 2022 (Elsborg et al, 2022), with 87% of identified studies published in the last 10 years and 55% published in the last 5 years.…”

“…In relation to study design, 22 of the included studies had a single or multiple control or comparison groups, including one study that had a post‐test‐only control (Quinn et al, 2003), and one that had a pre‐test‐only control (Chen et al, 2014). Study designs included RCTs ( n = 2; Cunningham‐Sabo & Lohse, 2013; Jacob et al, 2019), two‐group or multi‐group pre‐ and post‐test ( n = 16; Allirot et al, 2016; Auld et al, 1998; Bai et al, 2018; Battjes‐Fries et al, 2017; Caraher et al, 2013; Cunningham‐Sabo & Lohse, 2014; Dean et al, 2022; Elsborg et al, 2022; Ensaff et al, 2017; Harley et al, 2018; Højer et al, 2021; Liquori et al, 1998; Maiz et al, 2021; Moore et al, 2020; Yoshii et al, 2021; Zahr & Sibeko, 2017), single‐group pre‐ and post‐test ( n = 15; Adedokun et al, 2020; Al Ali et al, 2020; Cullen et al, 2007; Ehrenberg et al, 2019; Gutschall & Settle, 2013; Harmon et al, 2015; Heerman et al, 2021; Isoldi & Dolar, 2016, 2020; Isoldi et al, 2014; Jarpe‐Ratner et al, 2016; Overcash et al, 2018; Ritchie et al, 2015; Saha et al, 2020; Saxe‐Custack et al, 2021), between and/or within subject ( n = 3; Allirot et al, 2016; DeJesus et al, 2019; Van der Horst et al, 2014) and a mixed design ( n = 2; Chen et al, 2014; Quinn et al, 2003). Sample sizes ranged from 17 (Ehrenberg et al, 2019) to 1204 (Chen et al, 2014).…”

“…Assessment of the quality of studies resulted in two studies (Cunningham‐Sabo & Lohse, 2014; Dean et al, 2022) with a positive rating, 20 studies (Al Ali et al, 2020; Allirot et al, 2016; Auld et al, 1998; Bai et al, 2018; Battjes‐Fries et al, 2017; Bisset et al, 2008; Chen et al, 2014; Cullen et al, 2007; Cunningham‐Sabo & Lohse, 2013; DeJesus et al, 2019; Ehrenberg et al, 2019; Elsborg et al, 2022; Harley et al, 2018; Heerman et al, 2021; Isoldi & Dolar, 2016, 2020; Saha et al, 2020; Saxe‐Custack et al, 2021; Van der Horst et al, 2014; Yoshii et al, 2021) with a neutral rating and 16 studies (Adedokun et al, 2020; Caraher et al, 2013; Ensaff et al, 2017; Gutschall & Settle, 2013; Harmon et al, 2015; Højer et al, 2021; Isoldi et al, 2014; Jacob et al, 2019; Jarpe‐Ratner et al, 2016; Liquori et al, 1998; Maiz et al, 2021; Moore et al, 2020; Overcash et al, 2018; Quinn et al, 2003; Ritchie et al, 2015; Zahr & Sibeko, 2017) received a negative rating (Table 2). Further details on methods and methodological issues follow.…”

“…Additionally, some studies mentioned that recipes are age appropriate or age specific, but it is not detailed how this is determined. One study (Dean et al, 2022) Only five studies reported assessing sample size adequacy through power calculations (Allirot et al, 2016;Caraher et al, 2013;Cunningham-Sabo & Lohse, 2013Elsborg et al, 2022;Maiz et al, 2021), with one study's calculation not completed for the specific measures reported but for an overall project (Elsborg included some level of experiential practical food preparation. Three studies included no concrete experiences of hands-on practical food preparation, and, for example, they sent home recipes for preparation.…”

Food Literacy Scale: Validation through Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis in a Sample of Portuguese University Students

“…Therefore, a consumer who is endowed with greater food literacy can engage in a more conscious and informed decision-making process, aimed at a better health status. On the contrary, a low food literacy level can originate wrong food choices, with a decisive impact on disease [ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 ].…”