Acceptability and Feasibility of Best Practice School Lunches by Elementary School-Aged Children in a Serve Setting: A Randomized Crossover Trial
Jillian M. Joyce,
Kyleen Harris,
Emily L. Mailey,
Richard R. Rosenkranz and
Sara K. Rosenkranz
Additional contact information
Jillian M. Joyce: Department of Nutritional Sciences, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078, USA
Kyleen Harris: Department of Food, Nutrition, Dietetics and Health, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506, USA
Emily L. Mailey: Department of Kinesiology, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506, USA
Richard R. Rosenkranz: Department of Food, Nutrition, Dietetics and Health, Physical Activity and Nutrition Clinical Research Consortium, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506, USA
Sara K. Rosenkranz: Department of Food, Nutrition, Dietetics and Health, Physical Activity and Nutrition Clinical Research Consortium, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506, USA
IJERPH, 2020, vol. 17, issue 17, 1-25
Abstract:
Background: National School Lunch Program (NSLP) standards have improved school lunch dietary quality (DQ), however, further improvements could be made. Acceptability and feasibility of higher DQ are potential barriers. Thus, the purpose is to compare acceptability and feasibility of best practice (BPSL, optimizing DQ) with typical school lunches (TSL, meeting minimum NSLP standards) served separately and concurrently. Methods: Forty elementary school-aged participants were recruited for a randomized crossover trial. Participants attended three meal conditions (MC) choosing one of two meal types—MC1) BPSL1/BPSL2, MC2) TSL1/TSL2, MC3) BPSL/TSL. Acceptability included taste test surveys, weighted plate waste assessments, and hunger scales. Feasibility included meal cost, time, and skill and equipment requirements. Results: There were no significant differences in total taste test score, average total plate waste, or change in hunger ( ps > 0.017) before or after adjusting for covariates. TSL was selected significantly more often in MC3 (TSL = 83.3%, BPSL = 16.7%, p = 0.001). Meal cost ( p = 0.783) and skill and equipment requirements were not significantly different between meal types. BPSL required significantly longer preparation time (TSL = 60 ± 25 min, BPSL = 267 ± 101 min, p = 0.026). Conclusions: Results indicate few differences in acceptability and feasibility between BPSL and TSL. This study could inform decision and policy-makers seeking to improve school lunch DQ and acceptance of higher DQ meals.
Keywords: National School Lunch Program; dietary quality; child nutrition (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)
Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/17/6299/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/17/6299/ (text/html)
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:17:p:6299-:d:405987
Access Statistics for this article
IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu
More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().