Peer Reviewed Article Lack of Fruit in Diet

• Journal List
• Prev Chronic Dis
• five.eleven; 2014
• PMC4222785

Prev Chronic Dis. 2014; xi: E193.

Peer Reviewed

The Impact of Cooking Classes on Nutrient-Related Preferences, Attitudes, and Behaviors of School-Aged Children: A Systematic Review of the Bear witness, 2003–2014

Derek Hersch, BS, Laura Perdue, MPH, RD, Teresa Ambroz, MPH, RD, and Jackie 50. Boucher, MS, RD, CDE

Abstruse

Introduction

Cooking programs have been used to promote healthful eating among people of all ages. This review assesses the testify on childhood cooking programs and their clan with changes in food-related preferences, attitudes, and behaviors of school-aged children.

Methods

Nosotros systematically searched PubMed, Ovid-Medline, and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Wellness Literature) databases. We included master enquiry manufactures that involved cooking education programs for children and searched reference lists for eligible articles. Studies considered for review contained a hands-on cooking intervention; had participants anile 5 to 12 years; were published in a peer-reviewed journal on or after Jan i, 2003; and were written in English language. We used the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Cess Tool for Quantitative Studies to rate the strength of each commodity and appraise bias. The following data was extracted from each study: study design, sample size, location, duration, intervention components, data collection methods, and outcomes.

Results

8 studies met the inclusion criteria and used cooking instruction to influence children's food-related preferences, attitudes, and behaviors. Programs varied in duration, evaluation methods, and outcomes of interest. Self-reported food preparation skills, dietary intake, cooking conviction, fruit and vegetable preferences, attitudes toward nutrient and cooking, and food-related knowledge were among the outcomes measured. Plan exposure ranged from two sessions to regular pedagogy over ii years, and the effect of cooking programs on children's food-related preferences, attitudes, and behaviors varied among the reviewed studies.

Conclusions

Findings suggest that cooking programs may positively influence children's food-related preferences, attitudes, and behaviors. However, considering study measurements varied widely, determining best practices was hard. Further research is needed to make full knowledge gaps on ideal programme length, long-term furnishings, and usefulness of parent appointment, tasting lessons, and other intervention components.

Introduction

Since the 1980s, Americans take reduced the time they spend preparing and eating meals at dwelling house (1,2). The crusade of this cultural shift is unknown, although several suggested factors are increased proportion of parents in the labor forcefulness, food accessibility, and fourth dimension constraints from longer working hours (iii–v). These factors — along with a lack of bones cooking skills, healthful eating knowledge, or both — may influence families and, in turn, children, to increment their consumption of foods abroad from dwelling (ii). This beliefs is problematic, because restaurant meals often lack adequate amounts of fruits and vegetables and are often calorie-dense rather than nutrient-dumbo, which may result in poor nutrition quality and agin wellness outcomes if such meals are consumed regularly (half dozen–8).

Many interventions have attempted to increase consumption of and preferences for fruits and vegetables and influence other nutrient-related preferences, attitudes, and behaviors among children (9). Although these efforts may be improving children's overall health, it is unknown what intervention component is constructive at prompting the desired changes (10). Prompted by the shift abroad from habitation food grooming, researchers have begun to study cooking programs as a way to positively affect participants' food-related preferences, attitudes, and behaviors (5,11,12).

Although testify suggests that cooking programs are effective at improving nutrient-related preferences, attitudes, and behaviors amid adolescents and adults, their effect on children remains uncertain (xiii–17). A previous review of this topic identified only 4 studies, published betwixt 1995 and January 2008, and concluded that show on the benefits of cooking programs was lacking (18). Despite nix findings, cooking programs have been recommended by public health professionals to address the obesity epidemic (3,5). This systematic review aims to assess the latest evidence concerning childhood cooking programs and their association with children'southward food-related preferences, attitudes, and behaviors; inform futurity efforts; and identify gaps in the literature.

Methods

Data sources

This systematic review was conducted using methods developed by Thomas et al for public wellness enquiry (xix). Three databases, PubMed, Ovid-Medline, and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), were searched for primary enquiry articles published between January 2003 and March 2014 that involved cooking educational activity programs. This timeframe was chosen to obtain a sample of recent programs. An exhaustive search was conducted using medical subject area headings and keywords including cooking, education, and children. A reference listing search was also performed via articles that met the inclusion criteria and relevant papers in the field.

Study selection

Studies were considered for review if they contained a cooking education intervention for children anile 5 to 12 years. This age range was selected on the basis of the average age of elementary schoolhouse children in kindergarten through sixth grade; studies that included most children outside this age range were excluded. Interventions were the only studies of interest; therefore, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental studies were the just types of studies accustomed. To adequately assess program touch, the minimum sample size immune was 10. Cooking educational activity programs were divers as those that occurred in a community or school setting and involved food preparation lessons. Studies were required to adequately describe the cooking intervention and at least include the frequency of cooking activities and types of recipes made. Those studies that just evaluated a previously conducted intervention or did not contain easily-on cooking by children were also excluded.

Study titles and abstracts retrieved from the initial database searches were independently screened by 2 authors to determine suitability for review. Writer data and journal titles were not concealed from the reviewers. Manufactures with abstracts containing information that conflicted with at to the lowest degree ane of the inclusion criteria were excluded. Total-text articles of abstracts meeting all of the inclusion criteria were obtained through the Academy of Minnesota library. Two review authors independently inspected each commodity to make up one's mind aptness for review inclusion. Final decisions for inclusion and exclusion were fabricated by agreement among all listed authors (Figure).

Flow diagram depicting systematic literature search of cooking education programs for children aged 5 to 12 years published between 2003 and 2014. Abridgement: CINAHL, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Centrolineal Health Literature.

The catamenia diagram shows the number of manufactures obtained from each database published betweeen Jan 2003 and March 2014. A total of 197 articles were retrieved from the 3 databases of interest: PubMed, 69 articles; Ovid-Medline, 69 manufactures; and CINAHL Plus (via EBSCOhost), 59 articles. An additional 4 articles were institute during a hand search of reference lists in related literature. Before full text review, 85 duplicates and 95 manufactures that did not meet the inclusion criteria, every bit determined by their abstracts, were removed. This resulted in the exclusion of 180 manufactures. Total-text review was conducted on the 21 manufactures meeting abstract criteria. A total of 13 articles were excluded for 1 or more of the following reasons: v because the historic period of the population was exterior the range of interest (v to 12 years), 3 because the study design was observational and not experimental, 2 because they lacked relevant outcomes such as nutrient preferences, ane because the information were revisited in greater particular in a newer publication, and 2 because the study did not include an intervention. All authors reviewed the viii eligible articles and collectively decided that they were appropriate for inclusion.

Data extraction

Study data were independently obtained by 2 authors who were not bullheaded to the author data or periodical titles. The following data was extracted from each written report: study design, sample size, location, duration, intervention components, data drove methods, and outcomes. Study authors were not contacted, and only published information was extracted for this review. Quality assessments were independently conducted for each article past 2 reviewers. The Constructive Public Wellness Do Project (EPHPP) Quality Cess Tool for Quantitative Studies was used to charge per unit each commodity according to selection bias, report design, control of confounders, blinding, data collection methods, and withdrawal and drop-out rates (19). This assessment tool has been validated and recommended for use in systematic reviews of public health interventions to rate the methodological quality and validity of RCTs and quasi-experimental and uncontrolled studies (nineteen–22). Report components were rated using the EPHPP tool as strong, moderate, or weak. Studies were rated stiff overall if none of the components were rated weak, moderate overall if one component was rated weak, or weak overall if ii or more components were rated weak. Because of the low number of published articles on this topic, articles rated as weak, moderate, or strong were reviewed. Institutional review lath blessing was not sought or required for this report, according to U.s.a. Department of Health and Human Services guidelines (23).

Results

Overview of included studies

Viii manufactures met the inclusion criteria and were published between January 2003 and March 2014, in 7 dissimilar journals (Table ane) (24–31). Recruitment for all included studies occurred in the elementary or primary school setting; sample sizes ranged from 44 (29) to i,230 (27). Half-dozen (24–27,30,31) of the interventions were conducted during the school mean solar day and integrated into the classroom curriculum, 1 (28) took place in an subsequently-school program and was taught at a community garden, and the other written report (29) occurred in the evening at a community centre. Amidst 7 of the viii studies, the median number of structured sessions was x (range, 2–12 sessions) (24–29,31). The final study, which was integrated into the participating schools' curriculums, occurred on a weekly ground while school was in session for 2-and-a-half years, just the actual number of sessions was not reported (30). Duration of lessons were reported in 5 of the 8 studies, with a median time of 90 minutes (range, 90–120 minutes) (26–30). Three of the studies engaged parents, either through separate lessons (28,29) or a newsletter that was sent home (31).

Tabular array i

Characteristics of Included Studies that Involved Primary School-Aged Children and Independent a Cooking Component (n = 8)

Study Purpose	Study Design	EPHPP Rating	Sample Size	Elapsing	Intervention Components
Caraher et al 2013 ( 24 )
Determine the effectiveness of an in-school cooking program that uses chefs as instructors	2 group; quasi-experimental; pre–post assessment	Moderate	Intervention group: n = 86; control group: n = 83	2 sessions	Cooking lessons
Cullen et al 2007 ( 25 )
Increase fruit and vegetable consumption through a multimedia-based food grooming and eating behavior curriculum	Randomized; 1 group; pre–mail service assessment	Weak	Intervention group: due north = 671	10 sessions over 5 weeks	Cooking lessons; nutrition instruction
Cunningham-Sabo and Lohse 2013 ( 26 )
Determine the impact of a cooking and tasting plan on children's cooking attitudes, cooking cocky-efficacy, and fruit and vegetable preferences	Randomized; 2 group; pre–post assessment	Strong	Intervention group: northward = 137; control group: n = 120	3 ii-hour cooking classes and iii one-hour tasting sessions over 1 school semester	Cooking lessons; tasting activities
Cunningham-Sabo and Lohse 2014 ( 27 )
Compare the bear upon on children's cooking attitudes, cooking self-efficacy, and fruit and vegetable preferences between a cooking and tasting program, a tasting-only program, and a control group	3 group; quasi-experimental; pre–post cess	Strong	Cooking and tasting grouping: north = 539; tasting group: n = 294; control group: n = 397	v two-hour cooking lessons and 5 1-hour tasting lessons during a 9-month school year	Cooking lessons; tasting activities
Davis et al 2011 ( 28 )
Make up one's mind the effects of a culturally focused, 12-week gardening and cooking program on dietary intake and health outcomes among predominantly Hispanic, fourth- and fifth-grade students	two group; quasi-experimental; pre–post assessment	Moderate	Intervention group: north = 34; control group: n = 70	Twelve 45-infinitesimal nutrition and cooking lessons and twelve 45-infinitesimal gardening lessons over a 12-calendar week period	Cooking lessons; diet education; gardening lessons
Fulkerson et al 2010 ( 29 )
Airplane pilot a parent–child nutrition education program to increase family dinner frequency, parent self-efficacy in preparing good for you meals and child food preparation skills	2 group; experimental; post assessment	Moderate	Intervention grouping: n = 22; control group: n = 22	Five ninety-minute sessions over a 10-calendar week period	Cooking lessons; diet educational activity; tasting activities; group meals
Gibbs et al 2013 ( xxx )
Make up one's mind the effectiveness of an in-schoolhouse nutrition and gardening program on uncomplicated school children's willingness to attempt new foods	ii group; quasi-experimental; pre–mail cess	Weak	Intervention group: n = 463; control group: northward = 280	Weekly 45-infinitesimal garden and 90-infinitesimal cooking classes, while schoolhouse was in session, for 2.5 years	Cooking lessons; gardening lessons
Quinn et al 2003 ( 31 )
Improve attitudes toward and increase the fruit and vegetable consumption of fifth-course students	ii grouping; quasi-experimental; pre–mail service assessment	Weak	Intervention group: n = 81; control grouping: northward = 68	11 sessions	Cooking lessons; nutrition education

Abridgement: EPHPP, Effective Public Health Practice Projection.

The outcomes of interest and evaluation methods used varied (Table ii). 2 interventions evaluated participants' willingness to try new foods (30,31); 4 studies measured nutrient preparation skills and cooking confidence (24,26,27,29). Amidst the 5 studies that conducted preintervention and postintervention dietary assessments, 2 used 24-hr dietary recalls (25,29), one used a food frequency questionnaire (28), 1 used both methods (31), and 1 (24) used self-reported consumption of selected vegetables. Fruit and vegetable preference was also measured in 3 studies using a qualitative scale (25–27). Anthropometrics were obtained in 2 of the interventions, with torso mass index (BMI) equally an outcome of interest (28,29); 1 report (28) too measured waist circumference, claret pressure, and full body fat.

Table ii

Outcomes of Involvement, Evaluation Methods, and Major Findings of Included Studies (n = 8)

Result of Involvement and Evaluation Method	Major Findings
Caraher et al 2013 ( 24 )
Cooking conviction, vegetable consumption, and confidence in asking for favorite vegetable assessed by child questionnaire	Increment in cooking confidence among the intervention and control groups; increment in vegetable consumption in the intervention group; confidence to enquire parents for pasta salad ingredients increased in the intervention group
Cullen et al 2007 ( 25 )
Fruit and vegetable consumption assessed by 24-h dietary recall; fruit and vegetable preferences and self-efficacy for eating fruits and vegetables assessed by child questionnaire	An increase of ane combined serving of fruit, 100% fruit juice, and vegetables was observed for participants who had the highest baseline consumption of fruits and vegetables and completed two or 3 goals; increase in vegetable consumption was observed amidst those with the highest baseline consumption that completed 0 preparation goals or 1 preparation goal
Cunningham-Sabo and Lohse 2013 ( 26 )
Fruit and vegetable preferences, attitudes toward cooking, and cooking self-efficacy assessed by kid questionnaire	Participants in the treatment group had higher fruit preference scores, vegetable preference scores, and attitudes toward food and cooking and cooking self-efficacy than participants in the command group; baseline to follow-upwardly changes were besides greater in the treatment group than in the control group for vegetable preference scores, attitudes toward cooking, and food and cooking self-efficacy
Cunningham-Sabo and Lohse 2014 ( 27 )
Fruit and vegetable preferences, attitudes toward cooking, and cooking self-efficacy assessed by child questionnaire.	Participants in the cooking and tasting intervention had the highest increases in cooking self-efficacy; changes in fruit and vegetable preferences were greater among participants in the cooking and tasting grouping than among participants in the control group; changes in vegetable preferences were also greater amongst participants in both intervention groups than among those in the control groups
Davis et al 2011 ( 28 )
Overall health measured by BMI, total body fat, waist circumference, and claret pressure; dietary intake assessed by 41-item food frequency questionnaire	Dietary cobweb intake increased past 22% amidst participants in the intervention group, and dietary fiber intake decreased by 12% amid participants in the control grouping; diastolic blood pressure decreased more than amid participants in the intervention group than among those in the control grouping; overweight participants in the intervention grouping gained less weight and had a greater comeback in BMI than overweight participants in the control group
Fulkerson et al 2010 ( 29 )
Frequency of family unit dinners, nutrient sources, parental self-efficacy regarding healthful changes at home and child's food training skill assessed by parent questionnaire; food training skills assessed by child questionnaire; obesity condition measured past BMI; home food availability assessed by home food inventory tool; family unit meal quality assessed by brief mealtime screener tool; dietary intake assessed by 24-hour recall	Children in the intervention group rated their nutrient grooming skills higher than did participants in the command grouping; by parent study, child participation in repast preparation was college in the intervention group than it was amid children in the command group
Gibbs et al 2013 ( 30 )
Willingness to try new foods assessed by parent and child questionnaires; food choices and ability to describe foods assessed past child questionnaire	Children's willingness to try a new food if they had never tried it, cooked it, or grown information technology increased more amid participants in the intervention schools than among participants in the command schools
Quinn et al 2003 ( 31 )
Dietary intake assessed by 7-item fruit and vegetable food frequency questionnaire and 24-hour dietary recall; food-related knowledge, attitudes toward food, willingness to try new vegetables, exposure to healthful foods, and eating habits assessed by child questionnaire; perception of children'south attitudes and eating habits and household cooking and purchasing habits assessed past parent questionnaire	Participants in the intervention group consumed more cobweb than did participants in the control group; participants in the intervention grouping increased dietary folate, fruit servings, and milk servings; students in the intervention group were more willing to attempt new vegetables than were children in the command group; 44% of parents reported an increase in the amount of fruit and vegetables their children were eating since the program was completed

Abbreviation: BMI, body mass index.

Using the EPHPP tool (19), 2 (26,27) articles were considered strong in quality, 3 (24,28,29) moderate in quality, and three (25,xxx,31) weak in quality (Table 1). The selection bias and confounding components of the assessment resulted in the most weak ratings, with 3 studies each. Data collection methods and withdrawals and drop-outs had the most strong ratings, with 5 studies qualifying. Few similarities existed betwixt studies' quality ratings, except for Caraher et al (24)and Davis et al (28), which had identical ratings.

Effects of interventions

Outcomes of the included studies are summarized in Tabular array 2. The two studies that assessed children's willingness to try new foods found an increment postintervention in the intervention group compared with baseline (thirty) or a command grouping (31). Children were also more willing to try new foods if they had cooked or had grown it (30). When parents were asked about their child'south willingness to always endeavor new foods, a nonsignificant increase was observed (thirty). Caraher et al qualitatively measured students' preference for the 5 vegetables used in the class recipe (24). No significant change was observed in the control group's responses, but a significant increase was observed among those in the intervention group. Attitudes toward cooking and food were measured past cocky-report questionnaires in both studies conducted by Cunningham-Sabo and Lohse (26,27). Among 4th-graders in Colorado, changes in attitudes toward cooking and food were significantly greater among the intervention group than among the command grouping (26). Among children in New United mexican states, cooking attitudes did not significantly alter, regardless of the intervention grouping (27).

Food grooming skills and cooking confidence were determined in ii studies on the basis of participants' reported power to cut up fruits and vegetables, follow a recipe, and measure ingredients, amongst several other food preparation actions (24,29). Caraher et al observed a pregnant increase in cooking confidence scores (on a scale from i to 4) among both the intervention and control groups from baseline to follow-up (24). Fulkerson et al compared the food preparation skills of children and parents in intervention and control groups; they institute a significant departure amidst the children just not among the parents (29). Cunningham-Sabo et al also measured cooking self-efficacy and found significant improvements amidst 4th graders in Colorado (26) and New Mexico (27).

Among the 4 studies that measured children's preintervention and postintervention daily servings of fruits and vegetables, 1 (25) constitute significant increases from baseline in both fruit and vegetable consumption and 1 (31) found a meaning increase from baseline for fruit consumption simply. Nonsignificant increases from baseline were observed in the ii other studies (28,29). Caraher et al (24) used self-reported consumption of selected vegetables equally a proxy for overall vegetable consumption. Participants were asked preintervention and postintervention if they had consumed any of the v vegetables at least once over the past week. Although no difference was observed in the control group at follow-upwards, the proportion who reported eating 1 or more of the vegetables in the intervention group significantly increased from baseline. Two studies (26,27) out of 3 that measured children'south preferences for fruits, vegetables, or both found a significant increase from preintervention to postintervention; the third did not compare preintervention with postintervention and used the comparison only every bit an adjustor in the assay (25).

Among the studies that measured physical characteristics, findings were mixed. 2 interventions (28,29) institute nonsignificant changes in BMI from baseline to follow-up, and 1 (28) found no modify in total torso fat percentage from baseline to follow-up. However, Davis et al observed a significant decrease in BMI from baseline to follow-up among overweight and obese participants in the intervention grouping compared with overweight and obese participants in the control group (28). Improvements in diastolic blood pressure from baseline to follow-upward were significantly different between treatment and control groups (28).

Study quality

Overall study quality, as measured by the EPHPP tool (19), of the included studies ranged from weak to strong. Iii studies (29–31) likely are subject to option bias; samples were selected for convenience or participation was self-selected. Regarding report pattern, 2 (26,29) were RCTs, 4 (24,27,28,31) were quasi-experimental with control groups, and 1 (25) randomly selected individuals for the intervention only did not take a command grouping. 3 studies (24,25,28) lacked advisable consideration for confounders. Blinding was not mentioned in any of the included studies, and whether participants' responses were influenced past cognition of the enquiry aims is unclear. Data collection methods and tools were reported to exist valid and reliable in four studies (24,26–28), reliable in ane (29), with no information given in the remaining 2 (thirty,31). 5 studies (24,26–29) reported participation rates greater than 80%, 2 (30,31) had rates betwixt lx% and 79%, and 1 (25) did not report participation rates.

Word

Given the rising in childhood obesity and known cultural shifts away from cooking, a review of cooking programs targeting elementary schoolhouse children was conducted to empathize program design and outcomes and to inform research gaps. Similar to findings of previous systematic and informal reviews of the literature, we plant limited scientific articles written virtually the effectiveness of cooking interventions on children's nutrient-related preferences, attitudes, and behaviors (5,xviii).

Analyzing studies with intervention lengths ranging from ii sessions to regular pedagogy over ii years and with diverse outcome measurements makes determining best practices difficult. Data collection methods likewise differed profoundly amongst studies; simply 2 took physical measurements (28,29), and fruit and vegetable consumption was estimated predominantly by self-report or parent report. Because these collection methods vary in their reliability, generalizing the reviewed programs' effectiveness at influencing food-related preferences, attitudes, and behaviors is challenging. The availability of tools to effectively measure behavioral and dietary characteristics, especially amongst children, is a limitation in the field of nutrition (32,33).

Given that simply 2 (26,27) of the studies reviewed were considered strong co-ordinate to EPHPP criteria, at that place appears to exist a lack of high-quality intervention studies on babyhood cooking programs. The literature lacks an adequate number of studies that finer randomize participants to handling and control groups. In most cases, this lack of randomization results from the availability of schools that are willing and able to accommodate a cooking program. Inadequate funding may also be an effect, given that randomization of schools and stronger study designs as well require significantly more resources. Strict curriculum requirements may also touch on study design and researchers' ability to implement cooking interventions in schools; many schools practice not have the time to include additional lessons, resulting in a pocket-size pool of possible schools and, in turn, participants who can be adequately randomized. Equally a event, researchers may not accept been able to obtain a representative sample.

Despite various differences in delivery, each program had a meaning effect on one or more than of its participants' food-related preferences, attitudes, and behaviors, although this finding could be attributed to publication bias. In studies that measured it, children's willingness to try fruits and vegetables significantly increased after the cooking intervention (24,thirty,31). Furthermore, participants' fruit and vegetable consumption, equally reported by their parents, as well significantly increased (24,31). Once, these improvements were observed afterward only two cooking lessons (24). Although these brusque-term improvements are promising from a feasibility standpoint, repeated exposures are suggested to increase children's preference for fruits and vegetables (34–36). Longer programs tin incorporate more cooking skills, provide in-depth nutrition education, and better contain a culture of wellness into the school, the community, or both. It is besides unclear whether participants benefited from having their parents involved in the cooking classes. None of the studies measured the affect that the programs had on parents' food-related preferences, attitudes, and behaviors, although cooking programs for adults accept had a modest touch on diet quality and nutrient preferences (17).

Although some programs had a meaning short-term impact on children's food-related preferences, attitudes, and behaviors, the long-term sustainability of these changes is unknown. Ane written report conducted follow-upwardly surveys 6 months postintervention, but the results were non published (29). As more than evidence suggests that childhood weight condition is a skilful predictor of adult weight status, long-term evaluations that measure sustainability are needed to identify effective intervention strategies. Given that nutrient-related preferences, attitudes, and behaviors can change dramatically throughout course school, teaching sustainable healthful habits at a young age could have dramatic implications (37). Yet, the literature lacks substantial evidence about whether healthful habits taught at a young age are maintained.

This systematic review has some limitations. Efforts were made to capture all available published studies related to the aim of the review. However, selection and publication bias, inherent to the research modality, may be nowadays. Too, if manufactures did not fully describe the cooking interventions, they were excluded without contacting authors; therefore, an commodity could take met the inclusion criteria if more than information had been provided.

Our findings indicate that cooking education programs may exist a promising tool for promoting positive changes in children's nutrient-related preferences, attitudes, and behaviors. Although no best practices or consistent themes were found amidst the successful interventions, gaps in the evidence were identified to inform future studies. What components are necessary for an constructive program is unclear. Several blueprint elements of cooking programs as well require further enquiry: where programs should occur, the ideal number of exposures, whether diet education should exist paired with cooking lessons, the role of parent interest, and the usefulness of tastings and gardening activities. In terms of program outcomes, more evidence is needed to determine whether changes in food choices are occurring every bit a result of cooking interventions and whether changes are sustained through childhood and adolescence. Time to come studies should address these gaps through controlled trials that measure both quantitative and qualitative furnishings; ideally they should be conducted in diverse environments such as schools, community centers, and the abode.

Acknowledgments

This piece of work was conducted both as part of an internship and paid assistantship by Allina Wellness and the Minneapolis Centre Found Foundation.

Footnotes

The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal practice non necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Affliction Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions.

Suggested citation for this article: Hersch D, Perdue 50, Ambroz T, Boucher JL. The Impact of Cooking Classes on Nutrient-Related Preferences, Attitudes, and Behaviors of School-Aged Children: A Systematic Review of the Testify, 2003–2014. Prev Chronic Dis 2014;eleven:140267. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd11.140267.

References

1. Drewnowski A, Rehm CD. Free energy intakes of US children and adults by food purchase location and past specific food source. Nutr J 2013;12(1):59. 10.1186/1475-2891-12-59 [PMC free commodity] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

ii. Smith LP, Ng SW, Popkin BM. Trends in US home nutrient grooming and consumption: analysis of national nutrition surveys and time use studies from 1965–1966 to 2007–2008. Nutr J 2013;12(1):45. 10.1186/1475-2891-12-45 [PMC gratuitous article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

3. Condrasky Dr., Hegler M. How culinary nutrition tin save the health of a nation. J Ext 2010;48(2):2COM1.

4. Michaud P, Condrasky Yard, Griffin S. Review and application of electric current literature related to culinary programs for diet educators. Peak Clin Nutr 2007;22(4).

five. Nelson S, Corbin Grand, Nickols-Richardson SM. A call for culinary skills education in babyhood obesity-prevention interventions: current condition and peer influences. J Acad Nutr Diet 2013;113(viii):1031–6. x.1016/j.jand.2013.05.002 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

vi. Krebs-Smith SM, Guenther PM, Subar AF, Kirkpatrick SI, Dodd KW. Americans practice non see federal dietary recommendations. J Nutr 2010;140(x):1832–viii. x.3945/jn.110.124826 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

7. Powell LM, Nguyen BT. Fast-food and full-service eatery consumption among children and adolescents: outcome on energy, drinkable, and food intake. JAMA Pediatr 2013;167(i):14–xx. x.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.417 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

8. Jaworowska A, Blackham T, Davies IG, Stevenson 50. Nutritional challenges and health implications of takeaway and fast food. Nutr Rev 2013;71(v):310–8. 10.1111/nure.12031 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

9. Ganann R, Fitzpatrick-Lewis D, Ciliska D, Peirson L. Community-based interventions for enhancing access to or consumption of fruit and vegetables among v to 18-yr olds: a scoping review. BMC Public Wellness 2012;12(1):711. 10.1186/1471-2458-12-711 [PMC costless article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

10. Waters E, de Silva-Sanigorski A, Hall BJ, Brown T, Campbell KJ, Gao Y, et al. Interventions for preventing obesity in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011;(12):CD001871. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

11. Brown BJ, Hermann JR. Cooking classes increase fruit and vegetable intake and nutrient safe behaviors in youth and adults. J Nutr Educ Behav 2005;37(2):104–5. 10.1016/S1499-4046(06)60027-4 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

12. Hoelscher DM, Kirk S, Ritchie 50, Cunningham-Sabo L. Position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics: interventions for the prevention and treatment of pediatric overweight and obesity. J Acad Nutr Diet 2013;113(10):1375–94. 10.1016/j.jand.2013.08.004 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

13. Larson NI, Perry CL, Story M, Neumark-Sztainer D. Nutrient preparation by young adults is associated with better diet quality. J Am Diet Assoc 2006;106(12):2001–7. 10.1016/j.jada.2006.09.008 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

xiv. Condrasky G, Graham Yard, Kamp J. Cooking with a Chef: an innovative program to improve mealtime practices and eating behaviors of caregivers of preschool children. J Nutr Educ Behav 2006;38(5):324–5. 10.1016/j.jneb.2006.04.005 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

fifteen. Wrieden WL, Anderson AS, Longbottom PJ, Valentine K, Stead M, Caraher K, et al. The affect of a customs-based nutrient skills intervention on cooking conviction, food preparation methods and dietary choices — an exploratory trial. Public Health Nutr 2007;10(2):203–11. ten.1017/S1368980007246658 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

sixteen. Thomas HM, Irwin JD. Cook It Up! A customs-based cooking programme for at-risk youth: overview of a food literacy intervention. BMC Res Notes 2011;4(1):495. 10.1186/1756-0500-four-495 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

17. Reicks Thousand, Trofholz Air-conditioning, Stang JS, Laska MN. Impact of cooking and dwelling house food preparation interventions among adults: outcomes and implications for hereafter programs. J Nutr Educ Behav 2014;46(4):259–76. ten.1016/j.jneb.2014.02.001 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

18. Seeley A, Wu G, Caraher 1000. Should we teach cooking in schools? A systematic review of the literature of school-based cooking interventions. J Habitation Econ Inst Aust 2010;17(1):10–9. [Google Scholar]

19. Thomas BH, Ciliska D, Dobbins Yard, Micucci S. A process for systematically reviewing the literature: providing the research testify for public health nursing interventions. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs 2004;1(three):176–84. x.1111/j.1524-475X.2004.04006.x [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

xx. Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, D'Amico R, Sowden J, Sakarovitch C, Song F, et al. Evaluating not-randomised intervention studies. Health Technol Assess 2003;vii(27):iii–x, 1–173. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

21. Jackson N, Waters East. Criteria for the systematic review of health promotion and public health interventions. Wellness Promot Int 2005;20(four):367–74. 10.1093/heapro/dai022 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

22. Armijo-Olivo Due south, Stiles CR, Hagen North, Biondo PD, Cummings GG. Assessment of report quality for systematic reviews: a comparison of the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool and the Constructive Public Health Practice Project Quality Cess Tool: methodological research. J Eval Clin Pract 2012;eighteen(1):12–8. 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01516.x [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

24. Caraher M, Seeley A, Wu M, Lloyd Due south. When chefs adopt a schoolhouse? An evaluation of a cooking intervention in English primary schools. Appetite 2013;62:50–ix. 10.1016/j.appet.2012.xi.007 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

25. Cullen KW, Watson KB, Zakeri I, Baranowski T, Baranowski JH. Achieving fruit, juice, and vegetable recipe preparation goals influences consumption by 4th grade students. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Deed 2007;iv:28. [PMC free commodity] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

26. Cunningham-Sabo Fifty, Lohse B. Cooking with kids positively affects 4th graders' vegetable preferences and attitudes and self-efficacy for food and cooking. Child Obes 2013;ix(6):549–56. [PMC free commodity] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

27. Cunningham-Sabo Fifty, Lohse B. Touch of a school-based cooking curriculum for fourth-grade students on attitudes and behaviors is influenced by gender and prior cooking experience. J Nutr Educ Behav 2014;46(ii):110–20. 10.1016/j.jneb.2013.09.007 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

28. Davis JN, Ventura EE, Cook LT, Gyllenhammer LE, Gatto NMLA. Sprouts: a gardening, nutrition, and cooking intervention for Latino youth improves diet and reduces obesity. J Am Diet Assoc 2011;111(viii):1224–30. 10.1016/j.jada.2011.05.009 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

29. Fulkerson JA, Rydell S, Kubik MY, Lytle Fifty, Boutelle Thousand, Story M, et al. Healthy Dwelling house Offerings via the Mealtime Surroundings (HOME): feasibility, acceptability, and outcomes of a pilot study. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2010;18(1):S69–74. 10.1038/oby.2009.434 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

30. Gibbs L, Staiger PK, Johnson B, Block Thou, Macfarlane Due south, Gilt L, et al. Expanding children's food experiences: the impact of a school-based kitchen garden plan. J Nutr Educ Behav 2013;45(2):137–46. 10.1016/j.jneb.2012.09.004 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

31. Quinn L, Horacek T, Castle J. The impact of Cookshop on the dietary habits and attitudes of fifth graders. Topics Clin Nutr 2003;18(1):42–8. 10.1097/00008486-200301000-00006 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

32. Burrows TL, Martin RJ, Collins CE. A systematic review of the validity of dietary assessment methods in children when compared with the method of doubly labeled water. J Am Diet Assoc 2010;110(x):1501–10. ten.1016/j.jada.2010.07.008 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

33. Burrows T, Golley RK, Khambalia A, McNaughton SA, Magarey A, Rosenkranz RR, et al. The quality of dietary intake methodology and reporting in child and adolescent obesity intervention trials: a systematic review. Obes Rev 2012;13(12):1125–38. 10.1111/j.1467-789X.2012.01022.10 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

34. Wardle J, Herrera Yard-L, Cooke L, Gibson EL. Modifying children's food preferences: the furnishings of exposure and reward on acceptance of an unfamiliar vegetable. Eur J Clin Nutr 2003;57(2):341–viii. x.1038/sj.ejcn.1601541 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

35. O'Connell ML, Henderson KE, Luedicke J, Schwartz MB. Repeated exposure in a natural setting: a preschool intervention to increase vegetable consumption. J Acad Nutr Nutrition 2012;112(ii):230–4. 10.1016/j.jada.2011.10.003 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

36. Noradilah MJ, Zahara AM. Acceptance of a test vegetable afterwards repeated exposures amid preschoolers. Malays J Nutr 2012;18(ane):67–75. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

37. Lytle LA, Seifert S, Greenstein J, McGovern P. How do children's eating patterns and food choices change over fourth dimension? Results from a cohort study. Am J Wellness Promot 2000;14(4):222–8. 10.4278/0890-1171-14.4.222 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

---

Articles from Preventing Chronic Disease are provided here courtesy of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

---

semplebeestre.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4222785/

Share this post