Cited by 123Nutrition, Health and Food BehaviorObesity, Physical Activity, DietSchool Health and Nursing Education

Effects of Choice Architecture and Chef-Enhanced Meals on the Selection and Consumption of Healthier School Foods: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Open access
Cohen, Juliana F. W., Richardson, Scott A., Cluggish, Sarah A., Parker, Ellen, Catalano, Paul J., Rimm, Eric B.·2015·JAMA Pediatrics

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Little is known about the long-term effect of a chef-enhanced menu on healthier food selection and consumption in school lunchrooms. In addition, it remains unclear if extended exposure to other strategies to promote healthier foods (eg, choice architecture) also improves food selection or consumption. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the short- and long-term effects of chef-enhanced meals and extended exposure to choice architecture on healthier school food selection and consumption. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A school-based randomized clinical trial was conducted during the 2011-2012 school year among 14 elementary and middle schools in 2 urban, low-income school districts (intent-to-treat analysis). Included in the study were 2638 students in grades 3 through 8 attending participating schools (38.4% of eligible participants). INTERVENTIONS: Schools were first randomized to receive a professional chef to improve school meal palatability (chef schools) or to a delayed intervention (control group). To assess the effect of choice architecture (smart café), all schools after 3 months were then randomized to the smart café intervention or to the control group. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: School food selection was recorded, and consumption was measured using plate waste methods. RESULTS: After 3 months, vegetable selection increased in chef vs control schools (odds ratio [OR], 1.75; 95% CI, 1.36-2.24), but there was no effect on the selection of other components or on meal consumption. After long-term or extended exposure to the chef or smart café intervention, fruit selection increased in the chef (OR, 3.08; 95% CI, 2.23-4.25), smart café (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.13-1.87), and chef plus smart café (OR, 3.10; 95% CI, 2.26-4.25) schools compared with the control schools, and consumption increased in the chef schools (OR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.03-0.30 cups/d). Vegetable selection increased in the chef (OR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.83-3.54), smart café (OR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.46-2.50), and chef plus smart café schools (OR, 7.38, 95% CI, 5.26-10.35) compared with the control schools, and consumption also increased in the chef (OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.09-0.22 cups/d) and chef plus smart café (OR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.05-0.19 cups/d) schools; however, the smart café intervention alone had no effect on consumption. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Schools should consider both collaborating with chefs and using choice architecture to increase fruit and vegetable selection. Efforts to improve the taste of school foods through chef-enhanced meals should remain a priority because this was the only method that also increased consumption. This was observed only after students were repeatedly exposed to the new foods for 7 months. Therefore, schools should not abandon healthier options if they are initially met with resistance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02309840.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2014.3805

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Cohen et al. found an increase in fruit (0.34 vs. 0.51 cups; p < 0.05) and vegetable (0.14 vs. 0.30 cups; p < 0.05) consumption among students in schools with a professional chef compared to control.

    “In a study among 14 elementary and middle schools in Massachusetts using similar methods, Cohen et al. found an increase in both fruit (0.34 vs. 0.51 cups; p < 0.05) and vegetable (0.14 vs. 0.30 cups; p < 0.05) consumption among students in schools with a professional chef compared to students in control schools (as well as increased selection of these meal components) [57].”

    From Strategies to Improve School Meal Consumption: A Systematic Review (2021) · cites this paper as [57]

    The Results (page unavailable) report significantly greater fruit and vegetable consumption in chef schools than control schools after seven months, with differences of 0.17 and 0.16 cups per day, respectively; they also report increased selection. Those differences match the claimed pairs of values, but our copy does not state the individual figures of 0.34 versus 0.51 and 0.14 versus 0.30 cups, so those figures cannot be verified directly. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Previous analyses found no significant differences in food selection or consumption between students who actively consented and those who did not.

    “Previous analyses indicate that there were no significant differences in food selection or consumption between students who actively consented and those who did not.5,17”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

2 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cohen, J. F. W., Richardson, S. A., Cluggish, S. A., Parker, E., Catalano, P. J., & Rimm, E. B.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Project Bread, Boston, Massachusetts
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Cohen, Juliana F. W.
Venue
JAMA Pediatrics
Published
2015-05-01
Volume
169
Issue
5
Pages
431
ISSN
  • 1072-4710 (ISSN-L)
  • 2168-6203
OpenAlex
W2107396797
Cited by
123
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 6
FWCI
14.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (R25CA098566)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › School Health and Nursing Education
Keywords
choice architecture, school meals, dietary intake, vegetable selection, fruit selection, plate waste, professional chefs, primary and secondary school students, low-income schools, nutritional environment, food environment interventions, long-term intervention effects, fruit and vegetable intake, school nutrition policy
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Choice Behavior, Food Preferences, Food Services, Humans, Schools, Students, Vegetables

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review