Matching Items (3)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Nutrition surveys
- Creators: Bruening, Meg
Description
Background In the United States (US), first-year university students typically live on campus and purchase a meal plan. In general, meal plans allow the student a set number of meals per week or semester, or unlimited meals. Understanding how students’ use their meal plan, and barriers and facilitators to meal plan use, may help decrease nutrition-related issues.
Methods First-year students’ meal plan and residence information was provided by a large, public, southwestern university for the 2015-2016 academic year. A subset of students (n=619) self-reported their food security status. Logistic generalized estimating equations (GEEs) were used to determine if meal plan purchase and use were associated with food insecurity. Linear GEEs were used to examine several potential reasons for lower meal plan use. Logistic and Linear GEEs were used to determine similarities in meal plan purchase and use for a total of 599 roommate pairs (n=1186 students), and 557 floormates.
Results Students did not use all of the meals available to them; 7% of students did not use their meal plan for an entire month. After controlling for socioeconomic factors, compared to students on unlimited meal plans, students on the cheapest meal plan were more likely to report food insecurity (OR=2.2, 95% CI=1.2, 4.1). In Fall, 26% of students on unlimited meal plans reported food insecurity. Students on the 180 meals/semester meal plan who used fewer meals were more likely to report food insecurity (OR=0.9, 95% CI=0.8, 1.0); after gender stratification this was only evident for males. Students’ meal plan use was lower if the student worked a job (β=-1.3, 95% CI=-2.3, -0.3) and higher when their roommate used their meal plan frequently (β=0.09, 99% CI=0.04, 0.14). Roommates on the same meal plan (OR=1.56, 99% CI=1.28, 1.89) were more likely to use their meals together.
Discussion This study suggests that determining why students are not using their meal plan may be key to minimizing the prevalence of food insecurity on college campuses, and that strategic roommate assignments may result in students’ using their meal plan more frequently. Students’ meal plan information provides objective insights into students’ university transition.
Methods First-year students’ meal plan and residence information was provided by a large, public, southwestern university for the 2015-2016 academic year. A subset of students (n=619) self-reported their food security status. Logistic generalized estimating equations (GEEs) were used to determine if meal plan purchase and use were associated with food insecurity. Linear GEEs were used to examine several potential reasons for lower meal plan use. Logistic and Linear GEEs were used to determine similarities in meal plan purchase and use for a total of 599 roommate pairs (n=1186 students), and 557 floormates.
Results Students did not use all of the meals available to them; 7% of students did not use their meal plan for an entire month. After controlling for socioeconomic factors, compared to students on unlimited meal plans, students on the cheapest meal plan were more likely to report food insecurity (OR=2.2, 95% CI=1.2, 4.1). In Fall, 26% of students on unlimited meal plans reported food insecurity. Students on the 180 meals/semester meal plan who used fewer meals were more likely to report food insecurity (OR=0.9, 95% CI=0.8, 1.0); after gender stratification this was only evident for males. Students’ meal plan use was lower if the student worked a job (β=-1.3, 95% CI=-2.3, -0.3) and higher when their roommate used their meal plan frequently (β=0.09, 99% CI=0.04, 0.14). Roommates on the same meal plan (OR=1.56, 99% CI=1.28, 1.89) were more likely to use their meals together.
Discussion This study suggests that determining why students are not using their meal plan may be key to minimizing the prevalence of food insecurity on college campuses, and that strategic roommate assignments may result in students’ using their meal plan more frequently. Students’ meal plan information provides objective insights into students’ university transition.
Contributorsvan Woerden, Irene (Author) / Bruening, Meg (Thesis advisor) / Hruschka, Daniel (Committee member) / Schaefer, David (Committee member) / Vega-Lopez, Sonia (Committee member) / Adams, Marc (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
Individuals in urban low-income areas often do not have easy access to large grocery stores and supermarkets, and regularly shop at nearby small/corner stores. These stores stock an abundance of processed, energy-dense, nutrient poor foods, combined with few nutrient-dense products. A high concentration of small/corner stores is associated with poor diets by nearby residents. Interventions that target small food stores for increasing the availability and sale of healthy foods have been launched in many communities, and validated survey instruments have been developed to evaluate the effectiveness of the interventions. However, in-store surveys can take up to thirty minutes to conduct and require individual visits from investigators. Many projects assess the food environment in a large number of stores spread across broad geographical areas, making in-person evaluations infeasible and resource-prohibitive. The purpose of this study was to develop a valid and feasible short survey that could be used in-store or over the phone to capture the healthfulness of corner stores. An adapted version of the Nutrition Environment Measures Survey for Corner Stores (NEMS-CS) was used to conduct store audits of 230 corner stores in four New Jersey cities. Audit results were used in exploratory factor analysis and item response theory to develop a seven-item survey. The short survey was highly correlated with the full survey (r=0.79), and the short survey's classification of stores as healthy (top 20% of scores) versus unhealthy (bottom 80% of stores) matched NEMS-CS categorizations in 88% of cases. A second round of audits was conducted in 100 corner stores to confirm the validity of the seven-item survey and to test its feasibility as a phone audit tool. Complete phone responses were obtained from 86% of stores. Response matches indicated that store owners did not distinguish between 2% and low-fat milk, and tended to round up the fruit and vegetable count to five if they had fewer varieties. The seven-item short survey discriminates between healthy and unhealthy stores and is feasible for use as a phone audit tool.
ContributorsDeWeese, Robin (Author) / Ohri-Vachaspati, Punam (Thesis advisor) / Todd, Mike (Committee member) / Karpyn, Allison (Committee member) / Bruening, Meg (Committee member) / Wharton, Chris (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
Although many studies have looked into the relationship between home food availability and dietary intake, few have assessed actual change in the home food environment as a result of an intervention program. This secondary data analysis of the Athletes for Life 3 (AFL3) program investigated the efficacy of a randomized controlled 12-week community-based, family-focused exercise and dietary behavior intervention program in improving the home food environment of families with children between the ages of 6 and 11 years old. A total of twenty-six adults from Phoenix, Arizona allowed research staff into their homes to assess variety of food availability, using a modified version of the Home Food Inventory and were randomized to either the AFL3 program or wait-list control group. The main outcomes of interest were change in availability of vegetables, fruits, sugar-sweetened beverages and desserts and WIC-approved breakfast cereal. There was a significant increase in the number of vegetable items (3.88 ± 0.85; p=0.006) and WIC-approved cereal items (1.16 ± 0.31; p=0.003) in the homes of the intervention participants, relative to the wait-list control group. Additionally, there was a significant decrease in the number of sugar-sweetened beverage items (1.18 ± 0.31; p=0.014) available in wait-list control participant homes. There were no other significant findings related to home food availability. Furthermore, dietary intake among adult participants did not significantly change as a result of change in home availability. In conclusion, the AFL3 intervention program was successful in eliciting small but significant changes at a household level related to vegetable and WIC-approved breakfast cereal availability.
ContributorsGhan, Emily (Author) / Vega-Lopez, Sonia (Thesis advisor) / Bruening, Meg (Committee member) / Crespo, Noe (Committee member) / Todd, Michael (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016