Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
PURPOSE: Assess effectiveness of an intervention to improve fruit and vegetable consumption in economically disadvantaged young adults. DESIGN: Randomized treatment-control, pre-post design. SETTING: Ten states. SUBJECTS: Young adults (n = 2024, ages 18-24) were recruited from noncollege venues; 1255 (62%) completed assessment interviews at baseline and at 4 and 12 months. INTERVENTION: Treatment participants received a series of mailed materials and two educational calls in 6 months. Controls received a mailed pamphlet. MEASURES: Assessment calls determined two measures of fruit and vegetable intakes, demographics and stage of change at baseline, 4 and 12 months, plus treatment participants' decisional balance, processes, and self-efficacy. ANALYSIS: Repeated measure analysis of variance, intent-to-treat, chi2, and logistic regression. RESULTS: At follow-up, participants in the experimental group had higher intakes of fruit and vegetables than controls (perceived daily intakes of 4.90 vs. 4.60 servings per day, F = 3.49, p < .05 and 4.31 vs. 3.92 servings/day via 5-A-Day Screener, F= 4.78, p < .01) and greater progression to action or maintenance stages (66% progress in fruitfor intervention vs. 55% progress in fruit for controls; 47% vs. 32% progress for vegetables, p = .0080 and .0001, respectively). Lower education, non-White ethnicity, male gender, living with children, and experimental group assignment predicted attrition (chi2(6df) = 288, p < .001, Cox R2 = .132). CONCLUSIONS: Tailored educational messages and research-extension partnerships are advantageous for improving fruit and vegetable intakes of young adults.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nitzke et al. (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: