Chemicals, cans and factories: how grade school children think about processed foods.

OBJECTIVE: To determine how children interpret terms related to food processing; whether their categorisation of foods according to processing level is consistent with those used in research; and whether they associate the degree of processing with healthfulness. DESIGN: Qualitative data were collected from ten focus groups. Focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and thematic analysis was conducted. SETTING: Four elementary and afterschool programmes in a large, urban school district in the USA that served predominantly low-income, racial/ethnic minority students. PARTICIPANTS: Children, 9-12 years old, in the fourth-sixth grades (n 53). RESULTS: The sample was 40 % male, 47 % Hispanic with a mean age of 10·4 ± 1·1 years. Children's understanding of unprocessed foods was well aligned with research classifications, while concordance of highly processed foods with research categorisations varied. Five primary themes regarding the way children categorised foods according to their processing level emerged: type and amount of added ingredients; preparation method; packaging and storage; change in physical state or sensory experience; and growing method. Most children associated processing level with healthfulness, describing unprocessed foods as healthier. The most common reason provided for the unhealthfulness of processed foods was added ingredients, including 'chemicals' and 'sugar'. CONCLUSIONS: The current study demonstrated that children have a working knowledge of processing that could be leveraged to encourage healthier eating patterns; however, their understanding is not always consistent with the classification systems used in research. The vocabulary used by researchers and consumers to talk about processing must be reconciled to translate findings into actionable messages.

Reliability and Validity of Digital Images to Assess Child Dietary Intake in a Quick-Service Restaurant Setting.

BACKGROUND: Development of methods to accurately measure dietary intake in free-living situations-restaurants or otherwise-is critically needed to understand overall dietary patterns. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop and test reliability and validity of digital images (DI) for measuring children's dietary intake in quick-service restaurants (QSRs), validating against weighed plate waste (PW) and bomb calorimetry (BC). DESIGN: In 2016, cross-sectional data were collected at two time points within a randomized controlled trial assessing children's leftovers in QSRs from parents of 4- to 12-year-old children. PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: Parents (n = 640; mean age = 35.9 y; 70.8% female) consented and agreed to provide their child's PW for digital imaging, across 11 QSRs in Massachusetts in areas with low socioeconomic status and ethnically diverse populations. OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measures were interrater reliability for DIs, correspondence between methods for energy consumed and left over, and correspondence between methods across varying quantities of PW. ANALYSES PERFORMED: Intraclass correlations, percent agreement, Spearman correlations, Wilcoxon signed rank tests, and Bland-Altman plots were used. RESULTS: Interrater reliability ratings for DIs had substantial intraclass correlations (ICC = 0.94) but not acceptable exact percent agreement (80.2%); DI and PW energy consumed were significantly correlated (r = 0.96, P < 0.001); DI slightly underestimated energy consumed compared with PW (Mdiff = -1.61 kcals, P < 0.001). Bland-Altman plots showed high DI-PW correspondence across various energy amounts and revealed few outliers. Energy left over by BC was highly correlated with DI (r = 0.87, P < 0.001) and PW (r = 0.90, P < 0.001); and mean differences were not significantly different from DI (Mdiff = 9.77 kcal, P = 0.06) or PW (Mdiff = -2.84 kcal, P = 0.20). CONCLUSIONS: Correspondence was high between PW and DI assessments of energy consumed, and high with BC energy left over. Results demonstrate reliability and practical validity of digital images for assessing child meal consumption in QSR settings.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of 4 supplementary foods for treating moderate acute malnutrition: results from a cluster-randomized intervention trial in Sierra Leone.

BACKGROUND: Moderate acute malnutrition (MAM) affects 33 million children annually. Investments in formulations of corn-soy blended flours and lipid-based nutrient supplements have effectively improved MAM recovery rates. Information costs and cost-effectiveness differences are still needed. OBJECTIVES: We assessed recovery and sustained recovery rates of MAM children receiving a supplementary food: ready-to-use supplementary food (RUSF), corn soy whey blend with fortified vegetable oil (CSWB w/oil), or Super Cereal Plus with amylase (SC + A) compared to Corn Soy Blend Plus with fortified vegetable oil (CSB+ w/oil). We also estimated differences in costs and cost effectiveness of each supplement. METHODS: In Sierra Leone, we randomly assigned 29 health centers to provide a supplement containing 550 kcal/d for ∼12 wk to 2691 children with MAM aged 6-59 mo. We calculated cost per enrollee, cost per child who recovered, and cost per child who sustained recovery each from 2 perspectives: program perspective and caregiver perspective, combined. RESULTS: Of 2653 MAM children (98.6%) with complete data, 1676 children (63%) recovered. There were no significant differences in the odds of recovery compared to CSB+ w/oil [0.83 (95% CI: 0.64-1.08) for CSWB w/oil, 1.01 (95% CI: 0.78-1.3) for SC + A, 1.05 (95% CI: 0.82-1.34) for RUSF]. The odds of sustaining recovery were significantly lower for RUSF (0.7; 95% CI 0.49-0.99) but not CSWB w/oil or SC + A [1.08 (95% CI: 0.73-1.6) and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.67-1.4), respectively] when compared to CSB+ w/oil. Costs per enrollee [US dollars (USD)/child] ranged from $105/child in RUSF to $112/child in SC + A and costs per recovered child (USD/child) ranged from $163/child in RUSF to $179/child in CSWB w/oil, with overlapping uncertainty ranges. Costs were highest per sustained recovery (USD/child), ranging from $214/child with the CSB+ w/oil to $226/child with the SC + A, with overlapping uncertainty ranges. CONCLUSIONS: The 4 supplements performed similarly across recovery (but not sustained recovery) and costed measures. Analyses of posttreatment outcomes are necessary to estimate the full cost of MAM treatment. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03146897.