Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Whole grains, non-starchy vegetables, fruit, and beans are a consistent feature of diets associated with a lower risk of cancer and other diet-related diseases. For cancer risk reduction, the American Cancer Society recommendation is to consume at least 2.5 cups of a variety of fruits and vegetables daily. Other than dietary choices, weight control and physical activity levels are important modifiable determinants of cancer risk. This study finalized a novel, theory-driven farm-to-WIC intervention developed in preliminary work to promote vegetable intake among low-income adults served by the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC). In New Jersey (the location of the study), WIC provides participants up to $30 in seasonal Farmers' Market Nutrition Program (FMNP) vouchers and monthly cash value vouchers or CVV (valued at $11 for adults and $8 for children at the time of the study) redeemable at farmers' markets. The program combined behaviorally focused nutrition education with the establishment of a WIC-based farmers' market (implemented in the summer of 2019 during the FMNP voucher issuance period). Content to address other modifiable determinants of cancer risk was added. To create additional opportunities for experiential and hands-on learning, monthly trips to an area farmers' market were held (between September 1, 2019 [after the WIC-based market was discontinued] and November 30, 2019 [the end of the local growing season]). The research employed an experimental design to initially test the intervention in 3 WIC agency sites (1 intervention and 2 control sites) with 297 urban, primarily Hispanic adults. Program effects on primary outcomes of vegetable intake (measured objectively using dermal carotenoids as a biomarker of intake and via self-report) and FMNP voucher redemption (objectively assessed using data provided by WIC) were examined at mid- and post-intervention (3 and 6 months post-baseline, respectively). Intervention effects on potential hypothesized mediators and the redemption of CVV at farmers' markets, participant satisfaction with the program, and the cost-effectiveness of the intervention also were examined.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Experimental | This group will receive routine services provided by WIC and an intervention that will combine behaviorally-focused nutrition education with 1) the establishment of a WIC-based farmers' market (implemented in 2019 during the WIC Farmers' Market Nutrition Program voucher issuance period [June 19 to August 19]), and 2) monthly trips to an area farmers' market (between September 1, 2019 and November 30, 2019 [the end of the local growing season]). |
|
| Control | No Intervention | This group will receive routine services provided by WIC only. |
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Multilevel Behavioral Intervention | Behavioral | Behaviorally-focused intervention grounded in the Social Ecological Model and Social Cognitive Theory to promote vegetable intake and the redemption of seasonal Farmers' Market Nutrition Program vouchers and monthly Cash Value Vouchers at farmers' markets. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Vegetable Intake Carotenoid Scores at 3 Months | Vegetable intake was objectively assessed using a reflection spectroscopy device (the Veggie Meter) to measure the level of carotenoid pigments in participants' skin (scores can range from 0 to 800). Higher scores indicate a better outcomes (higher carotenoid levels). | 3 months |
| Vegetable Intake Carotenoid Scores at 6 Months | Vegetable intake was objectively assessed using a reflection spectroscopy device (the Veggie Meter) to measure the level of carotenoid pigments in participants' skin (scores can range from 0 to 800). Higher scores indicate a better outcomes (higher carotenoid levels). | 6 months |
| Self-Reported Vegetable Intake at 3 Months | Assessed with one of two items in a screening instrument developed by the National Cancer Institute. Participants reported the number of cups of vegetables (including 100% vegetable juice) they ate or drank each day (range 0-7). Higher numbers represent a better outcome (higher cups/day of vegetables consumed). | 3 months |
| Self-Reported Vegetable Intake at 6 Months | Assessed with one of two items in a screening instrument developed by the National Cancer Institute. Participants reported the number of cups of vegetables (including 100% vegetable juice) they ate or drank each day (range 0-7). Higher numbers represent a better outcome (higher cups/day of vegetables consumed). | 6 months |
| Number of Participants Who Redeemed Any Farmers' Market Nutrition Program (FMNP) Vouchers at 6 Months | Objectively assessed using data provided by the collaborating WIC agency. WIC reported whether participants redeemed any FMNP vouchers (yes or no) from baseline to 6 months. | 6 months |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Knowledge of Vegetable Intake Recommendations at 3 Months | Assessed via self-report with an item from the National Cancer Institute's Food, Attitudes, and Behaviors (FAB) survey. Based on their responses, participants were classified as knowledgeable of the recommended cups per day (yes or no). | 3 months |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Participants Who Redeemed Any Cash Value Vouchers or CVV at Farmers' Markets at 6 Months | Objectively assessed using data provided by the collaborating WIC agency. WIC reported whether participants redeemed any cash value vouchers at farmers' markets (yes or no) between baseline and 6 months. | 6 months |
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
● Restrictions of food intake (has food allergies or foods that cannot be eaten)
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Jennifer Di Noia, PhD | William Paterson University | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saint Joseph's WIC Program | Paterson | New Jersey | 07524 | United States |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 34209048 | Background | Di Noia J, Gellermann W. Use of the Spectroscopy-Based Veggie Meter(R) to Objectively Assess Fruit and Vegetable Intake in Low-Income Adults. Nutrients. 2021 Jun 30;13(7):2270. doi: 10.3390/nu13072270. | |
| 33972002 | Result | Di Noia J, Monica D, Jensen HH, Sikorskii A. Economic evaluation of a farm-to-Special Supplemental Nutrition Programme for Women, Infants and Children intervention promoting vegetable consumption. Public Health Nutr. 2021 Aug;24(12):3922-3928. doi: 10.1017/S1368980021001981. Epub 2021 May 11. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Recruitment occurred from June 3, 2019, to August 1, 2019. Participants were recruited via telephone (prior to forthcoming appointments with WIC) and in person at collaborating WIC agency sites.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | Intervention | This group will receive routine services provided by WIC and an intervention that will combine behaviorally-focused nutrition education with 1) the establishment of a WIC-based farmers' market (implemented in 2019 during the WIC Farmers' Market Nutrition Program voucher issuance period [June 19 to August 19]), and 2) monthly trips to an area farmers' market and local supermarket (between September 1, 2019 and November 30, 2019 [the end of the local growing season]). Multilevel Behavioral Intervention: Behaviorally-focused intervention grounded in the Social Ecological Model and Social Cognitive Theory to promote vegetable intake and the redemption of seasonal Farmers' Market Nutrition Program vouchers and monthly Cash Value Vouchers provided to WIC participants to purchase fruits and vegetables. |
| FG001 | Control | This group will receive routine services provided by WIC only. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
|
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | Intervention | This group will receive routine services provided by WIC and an intervention that will combine behaviorally-focused nutrition education with 1) the establishment of a WIC-based farmers' market (implemented in 2019 during the WIC Farmers' Market Nutrition Program voucher issuance period [June 19 to August 19]), and 2) monthly trips to an area farmers' market and local supermarket (between September 1, 2019 and November 30, 2019 [the end of the local growing season]). Multilevel Behavioral Intervention: Behaviorally-focused intervention grounded in the Social Ecological Model and Social Cognitive Theory to promote vegetable intake and the redemption of seasonal Farmers' Market Nutrition Program vouchers and monthly Cash Value Vouchers provided to WIC participants to purchase fruits and vegetables. |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Mean |
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Vegetable Intake Carotenoid Scores at 3 Months | Vegetable intake was objectively assessed using a reflection spectroscopy device (the Veggie Meter) to measure the level of carotenoid pigments in participants' skin (scores can range from 0 to 800). Higher scores indicate a better outcomes (higher carotenoid levels). | For vegetable intake carotenoid scores, analysis sample sizes were 137 in the intervention group and 124 in the control group. In the intervention group, 13 of the original 160 participants competed the baseline assessment only, 4 moved out of the area, and 6 discontinued their study involvement. In the control group, 10 of the original 137 participants completed the baseline assessment only, 2 moved out of the area, and 1 discontinued their study involvement). | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | 3 months |
|
Adverse events were monitored over the course of participants' involvement in the study (the 34-week period beginning June 3, 2019, and ending January 31, 2020).
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | Intervention | This group will receive routine services provided by WIC and an intervention that will combine behaviorally-focused nutrition education with 1) the establishment of a WIC-based farmers' market (implemented in 2019 during the WIC Farmers' Market Nutrition Program voucher issuance period [June 19 to August 19]), and 2) monthly trips to an area farmers' market and local supermarket (between September 1, 2019 and November 30, 2019 [the end of the local growing season]). Multilevel Behavioral Intervention: Behaviorally-focused intervention grounded in the Social Ecological Model and Social Cognitive Theory to promote vegetable intake and the redemption of seasonal Farmers' Market Nutrition Program vouchers and monthly Cash Value Vouchers provided to WIC participants to purchase fruits and vegetables. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jennifer Di Noia, PhD, Principal Investigator | William Paterson University, Sociology Department | 19737203714 | dinoiaj@wpunj.edu |
Not provided
| Type | Includes Protocol | Includes SAP | Includes ICF | Document Label | Document Date | Document Uploaded Date | Document File Name |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prot_SAP | Yes | Yes | No | Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan | Oct 19, 2021 | Oct 20, 2021 | Prot_SAP_000.pdf |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Knowledge of Vegetable Intake Recommendations at 6 Months |
Assessed via self-report with an item from the National Cancer Institute's Food, Attitudes, and Behaviors (FAB) survey. Based on their responses, participants were classified as knowledgeable of the recommended cups per day (yes or no). |
| 6 months |
| Home Vegetable Availability (Quantity) at 3 Months | Assessed with items from the Healthy Home Survey. Participants reported the number of fresh, frozen, and canned vegetables they had at home. Responses were summed across items to derive a total score (range 0-23). Higher scores indicate a better outcome (a higher number of vegetables at home). | 3 months |
| Home Vegetable Availability (Quantity) at 6 Months | Assessed with items from the Healthy Home Survey. Participants reported the number of fresh, frozen, and canned vegetables they had at home. Responses were summed across items to derive a total score (range 0-23). Higher scores indicate a better outcome (a higher number of vegetables at home). | 6 months |
| Home Vegetable Availability (Variety) at 3 Months | Assessed with items from the Healthy Home Survey. Participants reported the number of fresh, frozen, and canned vegetables they had at home. The number of different (unique) vegetables reported was summed across items to derive a total score (range 0-21). Higher scores indicate a better outcome (a greater variety of vegetables at home). | 3 months |
| Home Vegetable Availability (Variety) at 6 Months | Assessed with items from the Healthy Home Survey. Participants reported the number of fresh, frozen, and canned vegetables they had at home. The number of different (unique) vegetables reported was summed to derive a total score (range 0-21). Higher scores indicate a better outcome (a greater variety of vegetables at home). | 6 months |
| Vegetable Taste Preferences at 3 Months | Assessed with a single item (the Preference Rating Measure) querying overall, how much the participant likes the taste of vegetables (on a 7-point scale ranging from not at all to a lot). Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (stronger vegetable taste preferences). | 3 months |
| Vegetable Taste Preferences at 6 Months | Assessed with a single item (the Preference Rating Measure) querying overall, how much the participant likes the taste of vegetables (on a 7-point scale ranging from not at all to a lot). Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (stronger vegetable taste preferences). | 6 months |
| Vegetable Preparation Practices at 3 Months | Assessed via items from the Eating Among Teens and Young Adults Study (EAT)-II Survey (Laska et al., 2011). Participants reported how often, in the past month, they 1) bought fresh vegetables, 2) prepared a vegetable salad, and 3) prepared a dinner with vegetables. Responses were on a 5-point scale ranging from never to more than once a week. Ratings were summed across items to derive a total score. Scores can range from 1 to 15. Higher scores represent a better outcome (frequent use of the practices). | 3 months |
| Vegetable Preparation Practices at 6 Months | Assessed via items from the Eating Among Teens and Young Adults Study (EAT)-II Survey (Laska et al., 2011). Participants reported how often, in the past month, they 1) bought fresh vegetables, 2) prepared a vegetable salad, and 3) prepared a dinner with vegetables. Responses were on a 5-point scale ranging from never to more than once a week. Ratings were summed across items to derive a total score. Scores can range from 1 to 15. Higher scores represent a better outcome (frequent use of the practices). | 6 months |
| Vegetable Preparation Skills at 3 Months | Assessed via a single item (the Preparation Skills Rating Measure) querying how the participant would rate his or her overall skill in preparing vegetables (on a 7-point scale ranging from poor to excellent). Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater vegetable preparation skills). | 3 months |
| Vegetable Preparation Skills at 6 Months | Assessed via a single item (the Preparation Skills Rating Measure) querying how the participant would rate his or her overall skill in preparing vegetables (on a 7-point scale ranging from poor to excellent). Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater vegetable preparation skills). | 6 months |
| Social Support for Vegetable Consumption at 3 Months | Assessed via a single item (the Social Support Rating Measure) querying how much others support the participant to consume vegetables (on a 7-point scale ranging from not at all to a lot). Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater social support for vegetable consumption). | 3 months |
| Social Support for Vegetable Consumption at 6 Months | Assessed via a single item (the Social Support Rating Measure) querying how much others support the participant to consume vegetables (on a 7-point scale ranging from not at all to a lot). Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater social support for vegetable consumption). | 6 months |
| Self-efficacy for Vegetable Consumption at 3 Months | Assessed with a validated measure used to evaluate the Stellar Farmers' Market program (Dannefer et al., 2015). Participants rated how much they agreed or disagreed with statements designed to measure confidence in the ability to prepare and consume fresh produce. Item ratings are on a 4-point scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (4). Ratings were summed across items to derive a total score. Scores can range from 5 to 20. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater self-efficacy for vegetable consumption). | 3 months |
| Self-efficacy for Vegetable Consumption at 6 Months | Assessed with a validated measure used to evaluate the Stellar Farmers' Market program (Dannefer et al., 2015). Participants rated how much they agreed or disagreed with statements designed to measure confidence in the ability to prepare and consume fresh produce. Item ratings are on a 4-point scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (4). Ratings were summed across items to derive a total score. Scores can range from 5 to 20. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater self-efficacy for vegetable consumption). | 6 months |
| Body Mass Index at 3 Months | Height and weight were measured by trained research staff with participants wearing light clothing without shoes. Body mass index was calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in square meters. | 3 months |
| Body Mass Index at 6 Months | Height and weight were measured by trained research staff with participants wearing light clothing without shoes. Body mass index was calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in square meters. | 6 months |
| Number of Participants Who Met Physical Activity Guidelines at 3 Months | Assessed with a validated 2-item measure (the Brief Physical Activity Assessment Tool or BPAAT [Marshall et al., 2005]). The instrument consists of two questions, one that assesses the frequency and duration of vigorous intensity physical activity and one that assesses the frequency and duration of moderate intensity physical activity undertaken in a usual week. A scoring algorithm is used to derive a total score (scores can range from 0 to 8). Participants are classified as meeting current physical activity guidelines (yes or no) based on the scores (a score greater than or equal to 4 indicates that the participant is meeting current physical activity guidelines, whereas a score between 0 and 3 indicates that the participant is not). | 3 months |
| Number of Participants Who Met Physical Activity Guidelines at 6 Months | Assessed with a validated 2-item measure (the Brief Physical Activity Assessment Tool or BPAAT [Marshall et al., 2005]). The instrument consists of two questions, one that assesses the frequency and duration of vigorous intensity physical activity and one that assesses the frequency and duration of moderate intensity physical activity undertaken in a usual week. A scoring algorithm is used to derive a total score (scores can range from 0 to 8). Participants are classified as meeting current physical activity guidelines (yes/no) based on the scores (a score greater than or equal to 4 indicates that the participant is meeting current physical activity guidelines, whereas a score between 0 and 3 indicates that the participant is not). | 6 months |
| Overall Satisfaction With Intervention |
Assessed via a single item (the Overall Satisfaction Rating Measure) querying how satisfied intervention recipients were with the intervention (on a 7-point scale ranging from very dissatisfied to very satisfied). Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater overall satisfaction). |
| 6 months |
| Satisfaction With Intervention | Assessed with a 5-item measure developed by the investigators querying how satisfied intervention recipients were with the intervention. Item responses were on a 7-point scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Scores were averaged across items to derive a total score. Scores can range from 1 to7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater satisfaction with the intervention). | 6 months |
| 33487590 | Result | Di Noia J, Monica D, Sikorskii A, Nelson J. Pilot Study of a Farm-to-Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) Intervention Promoting Vegetable Consumption. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2021 Oct;121(10):2035-2045. doi: 10.1016/j.jand.2020.12.020. Epub 2021 Jan 22. |
| 34144918 | Result | Di Noia J, Monica D, Sikorskii A. Process Evaluation of a Farm-to-WIC Intervention. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2021 Oct;121(10):2021-2034. doi: 10.1016/j.jand.2021.05.014. Epub 2021 Jun 16. |
| Discontinued study involvement |
|
| BG001 | Control | This group will receive routine services provided by WIC only. |
| BG002 | Total | Total of all reporting groups |
| years |
|
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Race (NIH/OMB) | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Region of Enrollment | Number | participants |
|
| Nativity | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Place of Birth (Foreign-Born) | Place of birth was assessed in the subgroup of participants who were foreign-born (n = 209). | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Language Preference (Foreign-Born) | Language preference was assessed among the subgroup of participants who were foreign-born (n = 209). | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Years in U.S. (Foreign-Born) | Years in U.S. was assessed in the subgroup of participants who were foreign-born (n = 209). | Mean | Standard Deviation | years |
|
| Pregnancy Status | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Breastfeeding Status | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Educational Attainment | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Car Ownership | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Car Access: Ease of Borrowing a Car (If Not Owned) | Ease of borrowing a car was assessed among the subgroup of participants who did not own a car (n = 122). | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Car Access: How Often Can Use Car (If Owned) | How often can use car was assessed in the subgroup of participants who owned a car (n = 175). | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Supplement Use | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Smoking Status | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Past 7-Day Exposure to Secondhand Smoke | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Food Security Status | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Meeting Physical Activity Guidelines | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Body Mass Index | Height and weight were measured by trained research staff with participants wearing light clothing without shoes. Body mass index was calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in square meters. | Because weight and height were measured at the time of study entry, among pregnant participants, weight and height before pregnancy, and correspondingly, pre-pregnancy BMI could not be determined. Pregnant women (n = 54) were therefore excluded from analyses of BMI (analysis sample size= 242). | Mean | Standard Deviation | kg/m2 |
|
| Weight Status | Based on their body mass index, participants were classified according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) weight status categories. | Because weight and height were measured at the time of study entry, among pregnant participants, weight and height before pregnancy, and correspondingly, pre-pregnancy BMI could not be determined. Pregnant women (n = 54) were therefore excluded from analyses of weight status (analysis sample size= 242). | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Social Desirability Trait | Assessed with a 5-item measure of socially desirable response set (SDRS-5). Response options are on a 5 point scale ranging from definitely true (1) to definitely false (5). Extreme SDRS responses are scored 1, and all other responses are scored 0. Responses are summed across items to derive a total score (score range 0-5). Higher scores indicate a worse outcome (the tendency to give socially desirable responses on self-report measures). | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale |
|
| Children in the Household Aged 2-5 Years | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Vegetable Intake Carotenoid Scores | Vegetable intake was objectively assessed using a reflection spectroscopy device (the Veggie Meter) to measure the level of carotenoid pigments in participants' skin (scores can range from 0 to 800). Higher scores indicate a better outcome (higher carotenoid levels). | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale |
|
| Self-Reported Vegetable Intake | Mean | Standard Deviation | Cups per day of vegetables consumed |
|
| OG001 | Control | This group will receive routine services provided by WIC only. |
|
|
|
| Primary | Vegetable Intake Carotenoid Scores at 6 Months | Vegetable intake was objectively assessed using a reflection spectroscopy device (the Veggie Meter) to measure the level of carotenoid pigments in participants' skin (scores can range from 0 to 800). Higher scores indicate a better outcomes (higher carotenoid levels). | For vegetable intake carotenoid scores, sample sizes were 137 in the intervention group and 124 in the control group. In the intervention group, 13 of the original 160 participants competed the baseline assessment only, 4 moved out of the area, and 6 discontinued their study involvement. In the control group, 10 of the original 137 participants completed the baseline assessment only, 2 moved out of the area, and 1 discontinued their study involvement. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | 6 months |
|
|
|
|
| Primary | Self-Reported Vegetable Intake at 3 Months | Assessed with one of two items in a screening instrument developed by the National Cancer Institute. Participants reported the number of cups of vegetables (including 100% vegetable juice) they ate or drank each day (range 0-7). Higher numbers represent a better outcome (higher cups/day of vegetables consumed). | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | Cups per day | 3 months |
|
|
|
|
| Primary | Self-Reported Vegetable Intake at 6 Months | Assessed with one of two items in a screening instrument developed by the National Cancer Institute. Participants reported the number of cups of vegetables (including 100% vegetable juice) they ate or drank each day (range 0-7). Higher numbers represent a better outcome (higher cups/day of vegetables consumed). | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | Cups per day | 6 months |
|
|
|
|
| Primary | Number of Participants Who Redeemed Any Farmers' Market Nutrition Program (FMNP) Vouchers at 6 Months | Objectively assessed using data provided by the collaborating WIC agency. WIC reported whether participants redeemed any FMNP vouchers (yes or no) from baseline to 6 months. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | 6 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Knowledge of Vegetable Intake Recommendations at 3 Months | Assessed via self-report with an item from the National Cancer Institute's Food, Attitudes, and Behaviors (FAB) survey. Based on their responses, participants were classified as knowledgeable of the recommended cups per day (yes or no). | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | 3 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Knowledge of Vegetable Intake Recommendations at 6 Months | Assessed via self-report with an item from the National Cancer Institute's Food, Attitudes, and Behaviors (FAB) survey. Based on their responses, participants were classified as knowledgeable of the recommended cups per day (yes or no). | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | 6 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Home Vegetable Availability (Quantity) at 3 Months | Assessed with items from the Healthy Home Survey. Participants reported the number of fresh, frozen, and canned vegetables they had at home. Responses were summed across items to derive a total score (range 0-23). Higher scores indicate a better outcome (a higher number of vegetables at home). | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | Number of vegetables at home | 3 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Home Vegetable Availability (Quantity) at 6 Months | Assessed with items from the Healthy Home Survey. Participants reported the number of fresh, frozen, and canned vegetables they had at home. Responses were summed across items to derive a total score (range 0-23). Higher scores indicate a better outcome (a higher number of vegetables at home). | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | Number of vegetables at home | 6 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Home Vegetable Availability (Variety) at 3 Months | Assessed with items from the Healthy Home Survey. Participants reported the number of fresh, frozen, and canned vegetables they had at home. The number of different (unique) vegetables reported was summed across items to derive a total score (range 0-21). Higher scores indicate a better outcome (a greater variety of vegetables at home). | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | Number of different vegetables at home | 3 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Home Vegetable Availability (Variety) at 6 Months | Assessed with items from the Healthy Home Survey. Participants reported the number of fresh, frozen, and canned vegetables they had at home. The number of different (unique) vegetables reported was summed to derive a total score (range 0-21). Higher scores indicate a better outcome (a greater variety of vegetables at home). | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | Number of different vegetables at home | 6 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Vegetable Taste Preferences at 3 Months | Assessed with a single item (the Preference Rating Measure) querying overall, how much the participant likes the taste of vegetables (on a 7-point scale ranging from not at all to a lot). Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (stronger vegetable taste preferences). | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | score on a 7-point scale | 3 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Vegetable Taste Preferences at 6 Months | Assessed with a single item (the Preference Rating Measure) querying overall, how much the participant likes the taste of vegetables (on a 7-point scale ranging from not at all to a lot). Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (stronger vegetable taste preferences). | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | score on a 7-point scale | 6 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Vegetable Preparation Practices at 3 Months | Assessed via items from the Eating Among Teens and Young Adults Study (EAT)-II Survey (Laska et al., 2011). Participants reported how often, in the past month, they 1) bought fresh vegetables, 2) prepared a vegetable salad, and 3) prepared a dinner with vegetables. Responses were on a 5-point scale ranging from never to more than once a week. Ratings were summed across items to derive a total score. Scores can range from 1 to 15. Higher scores represent a better outcome (frequent use of the practices). | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | 3 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Vegetable Preparation Practices at 6 Months | Assessed via items from the Eating Among Teens and Young Adults Study (EAT)-II Survey (Laska et al., 2011). Participants reported how often, in the past month, they 1) bought fresh vegetables, 2) prepared a vegetable salad, and 3) prepared a dinner with vegetables. Responses were on a 5-point scale ranging from never to more than once a week. Ratings were summed across items to derive a total score. Scores can range from 1 to 15. Higher scores represent a better outcome (frequent use of the practices). | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | 6 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Vegetable Preparation Skills at 3 Months | Assessed via a single item (the Preparation Skills Rating Measure) querying how the participant would rate his or her overall skill in preparing vegetables (on a 7-point scale ranging from poor to excellent). Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater vegetable preparation skills). | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | 3 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Vegetable Preparation Skills at 6 Months | Assessed via a single item (the Preparation Skills Rating Measure) querying how the participant would rate his or her overall skill in preparing vegetables (on a 7-point scale ranging from poor to excellent). Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater vegetable preparation skills). | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | 6 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Social Support for Vegetable Consumption at 3 Months | Assessed via a single item (the Social Support Rating Measure) querying how much others support the participant to consume vegetables (on a 7-point scale ranging from not at all to a lot). Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater social support for vegetable consumption). | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | 3 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Social Support for Vegetable Consumption at 6 Months | Assessed via a single item (the Social Support Rating Measure) querying how much others support the participant to consume vegetables (on a 7-point scale ranging from not at all to a lot). Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater social support for vegetable consumption). | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | 6 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Self-efficacy for Vegetable Consumption at 3 Months | Assessed with a validated measure used to evaluate the Stellar Farmers' Market program (Dannefer et al., 2015). Participants rated how much they agreed or disagreed with statements designed to measure confidence in the ability to prepare and consume fresh produce. Item ratings are on a 4-point scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (4). Ratings were summed across items to derive a total score. Scores can range from 5 to 20. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater self-efficacy for vegetable consumption). | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | 3 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Self-efficacy for Vegetable Consumption at 6 Months | Assessed with a validated measure used to evaluate the Stellar Farmers' Market program (Dannefer et al., 2015). Participants rated how much they agreed or disagreed with statements designed to measure confidence in the ability to prepare and consume fresh produce. Item ratings are on a 4-point scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (4). Ratings were summed across items to derive a total score. Scores can range from 5 to 20. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater self-efficacy for vegetable consumption). | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | 6 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Body Mass Index at 3 Months | Height and weight were measured by trained research staff with participants wearing light clothing without shoes. Body mass index was calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in square meters. | For weight status, sample sizes were 137 in the intervention group and 124 in the control group. In the intervention group, 13 of the original 160 participants competed the baseline assessment only, 4 moved out of the area, and 6 discontinued their study involvement. In the control group, 10 of the original 137 participants completed the baseline assessment only, 2 moved out of the area, and 1 discontinued their study involvement. | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | kg/m2 | 3 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Body Mass Index at 6 Months | Height and weight were measured by trained research staff with participants wearing light clothing without shoes. Body mass index was calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in square meters. | For weight status, sample sizes were 137 in the intervention group and 124 in the control group. In the intervention group, 13 of the original 160 participants competed the baseline assessment only, 4 moved out of the area, and 6 discontinued their study involvement. In the control group, 10 of the original 137 participants completed the baseline assessment only, 2 moved out of the area, and 1 discontinued their study involvement. | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | kg/m2 | 6 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Number of Participants Who Met Physical Activity Guidelines at 3 Months | Assessed with a validated 2-item measure (the Brief Physical Activity Assessment Tool or BPAAT [Marshall et al., 2005]). The instrument consists of two questions, one that assesses the frequency and duration of vigorous intensity physical activity and one that assesses the frequency and duration of moderate intensity physical activity undertaken in a usual week. A scoring algorithm is used to derive a total score (scores can range from 0 to 8). Participants are classified as meeting current physical activity guidelines (yes or no) based on the scores (a score greater than or equal to 4 indicates that the participant is meeting current physical activity guidelines, whereas a score between 0 and 3 indicates that the participant is not). | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | 3 months |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Number of Participants Who Met Physical Activity Guidelines at 6 Months | Assessed with a validated 2-item measure (the Brief Physical Activity Assessment Tool or BPAAT [Marshall et al., 2005]). The instrument consists of two questions, one that assesses the frequency and duration of vigorous intensity physical activity and one that assesses the frequency and duration of moderate intensity physical activity undertaken in a usual week. A scoring algorithm is used to derive a total score (scores can range from 0 to 8). Participants are classified as meeting current physical activity guidelines (yes/no) based on the scores (a score greater than or equal to 4 indicates that the participant is meeting current physical activity guidelines, whereas a score between 0 and 3 indicates that the participant is not). | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | 6 months |
|
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Number of Participants Who Redeemed Any Cash Value Vouchers or CVV at Farmers' Markets at 6 Months | Objectively assessed using data provided by the collaborating WIC agency. WIC reported whether participants redeemed any cash value vouchers at farmers' markets (yes or no) between baseline and 6 months. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | 6 months |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Overall Satisfaction With Intervention | Assessed via a single item (the Overall Satisfaction Rating Measure) querying how satisfied intervention recipients were with the intervention (on a 7-point scale ranging from very dissatisfied to very satisfied). Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater overall satisfaction). | Satisfaction was measured among the subgroup of participants who received the intervention (n = 160). Of this number, 128 completed the measure of overall satisfaction with program. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | 6 months |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Satisfaction With Intervention | Assessed with a 5-item measure developed by the investigators querying how satisfied intervention recipients were with the intervention. Item responses were on a 7-point scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Scores were averaged across items to derive a total score. Scores can range from 1 to7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater satisfaction with the intervention). | Satisfaction was measured among the subgroup of participants who received the intervention (n = 160). Of this number, 128 completed the satisfaction measure. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | 6 months |
|
|
|
| 0 |
| 160 |
| 0 |
| 160 |
| 0 |
| 160 |
| EG001 | Control | This group will receive routine services provided by WIC only. | 0 | 137 | 0 | 137 | 0 | 137 |
Not provided
Not provided
| Unknown or Not Reported |
|
| Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander |
|
| Black or African American |
|
| White |
|
| More than one race |
|
| Unknown or Not Reported |
|
| Mexico |
|
| Other birthplace |
|
| Other |
|
| More than high school |
|
| Medium |
|
| Easy |
|
| Very Easy |
|
| Sometimes |
|
| Often |
|
| Always |
|
| Every day |
|
| Not reported |
|
| Not reported |
|
| Not reported |
|
| Overweight (BMI 25 to < 30) |
|
| Obese (BMI ≥ 30) |
|
| Two |
|