Abstract
Objective
To evaluate the impact of the University of Kentucky's Healthy Choices for Every Body (HCEB) adult nutrition education curriculum on participants' food resource management
(FRM) skills and food safety practices.
Methods
A quasi-experimental design was employed using propensity score matching to pair 8
intervention counties with 8 comparison counties. Independent-samples t tests and ANCOVA models compared gains in FRM skills and food safety practices between
the intervention and comparison groups (n = 413 and 113, respectively).
Results
Propensity score matching analysis showed a statistical balance and similarities between
the comparison and intervention groups. Food resource management and food safety gain
scores were statistically significantly higher for the intervention group (P < .001), with large effect sizes (d = 0.9) for both variables. The group differences persisted even after controlling
for race and age in the ANCOVA models.
Conclusions and Implications
The HCEB curriculum was effective in improving the FRM skills and food safety practices
of participants.
Key Words
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessSNEB Member Login
SNEB Members, full access to the journal is a member benefit. Login via the SNEB Website to access all journal content and features.Subscribe:
Subscribe to Journal of Nutrition Education and BehaviorAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Cooking Matters for Adults improves food resource management skills and self-confidence among low-income participants.J Nutr Educ Behav. 2017; 49: 546-553
- Outcome effectiveness of the widely adopted EFNEP curriculum Eating Smart ∙ Being Active.J Nutr Educ Behav. 2015; 47: 19-27
- The impact of nutrition education on food insecurity among low-income participants in EFNEP.Fam Consum Sci Res J. 2003; 32: 127-139
- The impact of SNAP-ED and EFNEP on program graduates 6 months after graduation.J Extension. 2011; 49: 5RIB6https://www.joe.org/joe/2011october/pdf/JOE_v49_5rb6.pdfDate accessed: March 8, 2018
- Long-term evaluation of EFNEP and SNAP-Ed.http://ncsu.edu/ffci/publications/2012/v17-n2-2012-summer-fall/wardlaw-baker.phpDate: 2012Date accessed: December 22, 2017
- Food resource management education with SNAP participation improves food security.J Nutr Educ Behav. 2015; 47: 374-378
- A randomized controlled trial of a community-based nutrition education program for low-income parents.J Nutr Educ Behav. 2014; 46: 102-109
- Get Cookin': investigating the effects of a six-week cooking intervention on cooking and dietary behaviors among low-income families.Californian J Health Promot. 2015; 13: 48-60
- Foodborne illness incidence rates and food safety risks for populations of low socioeconomic status and minority race/ethnicity: a review of the literature.Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2013; 10: 3634-3652
- SNAP-Ed (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program-Education) increases long-term food security among Indiana households with children in a randomized controlled study.J Nutr. 2016; 146: 2375-2382
- Evaluating effectiveness of the Arkansas Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program on changing food resource management and nutrition practice outcomes.FASEB J. 2015; 29: 911-917
- The Adult Learner: A Neglected Species.Gulf Publishing, Houston, TX1990
- MyPlate.
- Eating Smart ∙ Being Active: A Healthy Eating, Active Living Curriculum.http://eatingsmartbeingactive.colostate.edu/about/description/Date accessed: October 13, 2017
- An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies.Multivariate Behav Res. 2011; 46: 399-424
- A comparison of 12 algorithms for matching on the propensity score.Stat Med. 2014; 33: 1057-1069
- Selecting an appropriate caliper can be essential for achieving good balance with propensity score matching.Am J Epidemiol. 2014; 179: 226-235
- The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects.Biometrika. 1983; 70: 41-55
- Propensity score matching in SPSS.http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1201/1201.6385.pdfDate accessed: March 25, 2017
- WebNEERS.https://nifa.usda.gov/tool/webneersDate accessed: November 18, 2016
- Best practices in explanatory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis.Pract Assess Res Eval. 2005; 10http://pareonline.net/pdf/v10n7.pdfDate accessed: March 8, 2018
- Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests.Psychometrika. 1951; 16: 297-334
- Covariate balance in simple, stratified and clustered comparative studies.Stat Sci. 2008; 23: 219-236
- CEM: software for coarsened exact matching.J Stat Softw. 2009; 30: 1-27
- Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences.2nd ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ1988
- Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs.Front Psychol. 2013; 4: 863
- Food practices and nutrition knowledge after graduation from the Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program (EFNEP).J Nutr Educ Behav. 2000; 32: 130-138
- Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Examining the Evidence to Define Benefit Adequacy.Institute of Medicine, Washington, DC2013
Article info
Publication history
Published online: April 03, 2018
Accepted:
February 15,
2018
Footnotes
Conflict of Interest Disclosure: The authors have not stated any conflicts of interest.
Identification
Copyright
© 2018 Society for Nutrition Education and Behavior. Published by Elsevier, Inc. All rights reserved.
