School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW 2308, Australia.
Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, Newcastle, NSW 2305, Australia.
Nutrients. 2022 Sep 2;14(17):3640. doi: 10.3390/nu14173640.
The education sector is recognised as an ideal platform to promote good nutrition and decision making around food and eating. Examining adolescents in this setting is important because of the unique features of adolescence compared to younger childhood. This systematic review and meta-analysis examine interventions in secondary schools that provide a routine meal service and the impact on adolescents’ food behaviours, health and dining experience in this setting. The review was guided by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Checklist and Cochrane Handbook recommendations. Studies published in English searched in four databases and a hand search yielded 42 interventions in 35 studies. Risk of bias was assessed independently by two reviewers. Interventions were classified using the NOURISHING framework, and their impact analysed using meta-analysis, vote-counting synthesis or narrative summary. The meta-analysis showed an improvement in students selecting vegetables (odds ratio (OR): 1.39; 1.12 to 1.23; p = 0.002), fruit serves selected (mean difference (MD): 0.09; 0.09 to 0.09; p < 0.001) and consumed (MD: 0.10; 0.04 to 0.15; p < 0.001), and vegetable serves consumed (MD: 0.06; 0.01 to 0.10; p = 0.024). Vote-counting showed a positive impact for most interventions that measured selection (15 of 25; 41% to 77%; p = 0.002) and consumption (14 of 24; 39% to 76%; p = 0.013) of a meal component. Interventions that integrate improving menu quality, assess palatability, accessibility of healthier options, and student engagement can enhance success. These results should be interpreted with caution as most studies were not methodologically strong and at higher risk of bias. There is a need for higher quality pragmatic trials, strategies to build and measure sustained change, and evaluation of end-user attitudes and perceptions towards intervention components and implementation for greater insight into intervention success and future directions (PROSPERO registration: CRD42020167133).
教育领域被认为是促进良好营养和食物及饮食决策的理想平台。在这种环境下研究青少年很重要,因为与幼儿期相比,青少年具有独特的特征。本系统评价和荟萃分析研究了在中学提供常规膳食服务的干预措施,以及这些干预措施对青少年在这种环境下的食物行为、健康和用餐体验的影响。本综述遵循系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目 (PRISMA) 清单和 Cochrane 手册建议。在四个数据库中以英文发表的研究以及手工搜索共获得 35 项研究中的 42 项干预措施。两名评审员独立评估了偏倚风险。干预措施使用滋养框架进行分类,并使用荟萃分析、投票计数综合或叙述性总结分析其影响。荟萃分析显示,学生选择蔬菜的比例有所提高(优势比 (OR):1.39;1.12 至 1.23;p = 0.002),所选水果份量增加(平均差异 (MD):0.09;0.09 至 0.09;p < 0.001)和食用(MD:0.10;0.04 至 0.15;p < 0.001),以及蔬菜份量增加(MD:0.06;0.01 至 0.10;p = 0.024)。投票计数显示,对于大多数测量膳食成分选择(25 项中的 15 项;41%至 77%;p = 0.002)和消耗(24 项中的 14 项;39%至 76%;p = 0.013)的干预措施,其结果呈阳性。整合提高菜单质量、评估适口性、改善健康选择的可及性以及提高学生参与度的干预措施可以提高成功率。由于大多数研究方法不够强大且偏倚风险较高,因此应谨慎解释这些结果。需要更高质量的实用试验、构建和衡量持续变化的策略,以及评估最终用户对干预措施组件和实施的态度和看法,以更深入地了解干预措施的成功和未来方向(PROSPERO 注册:CRD42020167133)。