CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 93Food Security and Health in Diverse PopulationsNutrition, Health and Food BehaviorObesity, Physical Activity, Diet

Veggie Rx: an outcome evaluation of a healthy food incentive programme

Open access
Cavanagh, Michelle, Jurkowski, Janine, Bozlak, Christine, Hastings, Julia, Klein, Amy·2017·Public Health Nutrition
DOI 10.1017/s1368980016002081PMC PMC5743436
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: One challenge to healthy nutrition, especially among low-income individuals, is access to and consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables. To address this problem, Veggie Rx, a healthy food incentive programme, was established within a community clinic to increase access to fresh produce for low-income patients diagnosed with obesity, hypertension and/or type 2 diabetes. The current research aimed to evaluate Veggie Rx programme effectiveness. DESIGN: A retrospective pre/post design using medical records and programme data was used to evaluate the programme. The study was approved by the University of Albany Institutional Review Board and the Patient Interest Committee of a community clinic. SETTING: The study was conducted in a low-income, urban neighbourhood in upstate New York. SUBJECTS: Medical record data and Veggie Rx programme data were analysed for fifty-four eligible participants. An equal-sized control group of patients who were not programme participants were matched on age, ethnicity and co-morbidity status. RESULTS: A statistically significant difference in mean BMI change (P=0·02) between the intervention and the control group was calculated. The intervention group had a mean decrease in BMI of 0·74 kg/m2. CONCLUSIONS: Greater improvement in BMI was found among Veggie Rx programme participants. This information will guide programme changes and inform the field on the effectiveness of healthy food incentive programmes for improving health outcomes for low-income populations.

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 · 10.1017/s1368980016002081

Cites

4 of 4 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?

  • Two studies evaluated an intervention that provided vouchers for an onsite farmers market.

    “Two studies evaluated an intervention that provided vouchers for an onsite farmers market. 25,32”

    From Interventions Addressing Food Insecurity in Health Care Settings: A Systematic Review (2019) · cites this paper as [25]

    The Participants and methods > Setting section says Veggie Rx issued produce coupons redeemable at a mobile produce market that stopped weekly at the health center. That supports this paper as one of the two studies, but the paper describes a mobile produce market, not an onsite farmers market. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The second study found a small but significant effect of the intervention on lowering body mass index compared with matched controls in patients with obesity, hypertension, and/or type 2 diabetes.

    “The second study in this group provided vouchers through a nutritionist to patients with obesity, hypertension, and/or type 2 diabetes and found a small but significant effect of the intervention on lowering body mass index compared with matched controls 25 (Table 3).”

    From Interventions Addressing Food Insecurity in Health Care Settings: A Systematic Review (2019) · cites this paper as [25]

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 17

  1. [2]Corral I Landrine H Hao Y 2012 Residential segregation, health behavior and overweight/obesity among a national sample of African American adults J Health Psychol 17 371 378 21844135
  2. [3]Wang Y Beydoun MA 2007 The obesity epidemic in the United States – gender, age, socioeconomic, racial/ethnic, and geographic characteristics: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis Epidemiol Rev 29 6 28 17510091
  3. [4]Moyer VA 2012 Screening of obesity in adults: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement Ann Intern Med 157 373 378 22733087
  4. [5]US Department of Health and Human Services 2010 The Surgeons General’s Vision for a Healthy and Fit Nation http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK44656/#background.s5 (accessed March 2015)
  5. [6]Robinson T 2008 Applying the socio-ecological model to improving fruit and vegetable intake among low-income African Americans J Community Health 33 395 406 18594953
  6. [7]Foltz JL Harris DM Blanck HM 2012 Support among US adults for local and state policies to increase fruit and vegetable access Am J Prev Med 43 3 Suppl 2 S102 S108 22898158 PMC10880681
  7. [9]Sobal J Bisogni A 2009 Constructing food choice decisions Ann Behav Med 38 Suppl 1 S37 S46 19787306
  8. [10]Dauchet L Amouyel P Hercberg S 2006 Fruit and vegetable consumption and risk of coronary heart disease: a meta-analysis of cohort studies J Nutr 136 2588 2593 16988131
  9. [11]Khan L Sobush K Keener D 2009 Recommended community strategies and measurements to prevent obesity in the United States MMWR Recomm Rep 58 1 26 19629029
  10. [13]Herman DR Harrison GG Afifi AA 2008 Effect of a targeted subsidy on intake of fruits and vegetables among low-income women in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children Am J Public Health 98 98 105 18048803 PMC2156076
  11. [14]Friedman DB Freedman DA Choi SK 2013 Patient communication and role modeling related to patients’ perceptions and use of a federally qualified health center-based farmers’ market Health Promot Pract 15 288 297 23986503 PMC3871943
  12. [21]Black AP Vally H Morris PS 2013 Health outcomes of a subsidised fruit and vegetable program for Aboriginal children in northern New South Wales Med J Aust 199 46 50 23829264
  13. [22]Van Duyn MA Pivonka E 2000 Overview of the health benefits of fruit and vegetable consumption for the dietetics professional: selected literature J Am Diet Assoc 100 1511 1521 11138444
  14. [23]Lloyd-Jones DM Liu K Colangelo LA 2007 Consistently stable or decreased body mass index in young adulthood and longitudinal changes in metabolic syndrome components Circulation 115 1004 1011 17283263
  15. [24]Hill J 2009 Can a small-changes approach help address the obesity epidemic? A report of the Joint Task Force of the American Society for Nutrition, Institute of Food Technologists, and International Food Information Council Am J Clin Nutr 89 477 484 19088151
  16. [25]Eckel R Krauss R 1998 American Heart Association call to action: obesity as a major risk factor for coronary heart disease Circulation 97 2099 2100 9626167
  17. [28]Davison KK Jurkowski JM Lawson HA 2013 Reframing family-centred obesity prevention using the Family Ecological Model Public Health Nutr 16 1861 1869 23089267 PMC5500251

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cavanagh, M., Jurkowski, J., Bozlak, C., Hastings, J., & Klein, A.
Affiliations
University at Albany, State University of New York (US)
Corresponding author
Jurkowski, Janine
ORCID
Venue
Public Health Nutrition
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2016-08-19
Volume
20
Issue
14
Pages
2636-2641
ISSN
  • 1368-9800 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-2727
DOI
10.1017/s1368980016002081
PMC
PMC5743436
OpenAlex
W2517720202
Cited by
93
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1
FWCI
8.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Public Health Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (K22MD003934)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Food Security and Health in Diverse Populations
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Keywords
fruit and vegetable intake, low-income populations, obesity, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, body mass index change, community clinics, access to fresh produce
MeSH terms
Diet, Healthy, Adult, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Food Supply, Fruit, Humans, Hypertension, Motivation, New York, Nutritional Status, Obesity, Poverty, Residence Characteristics, Retrospective Studies, Urban Population, Vegetables, Program Evaluation, Health Behavior, Body Mass Index, Case-Control Studies, Treatment Outcome

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