4.1 Article

Socioeconomic Differences in the Association Between Competitive Food Laws and the School Food Environment

期刊

JOURNAL OF SCHOOL HEALTH
卷 85, 期 9, 页码 578-586

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/josh.12288

关键词

nutrition and diet; health policy; public health; child and adolescent health; evaluation

资金

  1. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
  2. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [R01HL096664]
  3. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [R00HD073271]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUNDSchools of low socioeconomic status (SES) tend to sell fewer healthy competitive foods/beverages. This study examined whether state competitive food laws may reduce such disparities. METHODSSchool administrators for fifth- and eighth grade reported foods and beverages sold in school. Index measures of the food/beverage environments were constructed from these data. Schools were classified into SES tertiles based on median household income of students' postal zip code. Regression models were used to estimate SES differences in (1) Healthy School Food Environment Index (HSFEI) score, Healthy School Beverage Environment Index (HSBEI) score, and specific food/beverage sales, and (2) associations between state competitive food/beverage laws and HSFEI score, HSBEI score, and specific food/beverage sales. RESULTSStrong competitive food laws were positively associated with HSFEI in eighth grade, regardless of SES. Strong competitive beverage laws were positively associated with HSBEI particularly in low-SES schools in eighth grade. These associations were attributable to schools selling fewer unhealthy items, not providing healthy alternatives. High-SES schools sold more healthy items than low-SES schools regardless of state laws. CONCLUSIONSStrong competitive food laws may reduce access to unhealthy foods/beverages in middle schools, but additional initiatives are needed to provide students with healthy options, particularly in low-SES areas.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据