Impact of nutrition rating system on food selection in client-choice food pantries

Last registered on September 21, 2018
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Impact of nutrition rating system on food selection in client-choice food pantries
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0003289
Initial registration date
September 16, 2018

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
September 21, 2018, 12:15 AM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

Country
United States of America
Region
IN

Primary Investigator

Name
Bhagyashree Katare
Affiliation
Purdue University
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Brittni Echols
PI Affiliation
Purdue University
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Paul Preckel
PI Affiliation
Purdue University
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Rodolfo Nayga
PI Affiliation
University of Arkansas
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2018-10-22
End date
2018-11-30
Keywords
Health
Additional Keywords
Food choice, Nutrition, Food banks
JEL code(s)
D01, I12
Secondary IDs
Abstract
Client-choice food pantries provide greater choice in food item selection relative to traditional food banks. However, there is a potential for the clients to select a food bundle that is nutritionally deficient. With the prevalence of lower nutritional status among the clients due to poor dietary choices, it is important that food pantry stakeholders encourage clients to make healthier diet choices. More than 30% of the food pantry client households have at least one member diagnosed with diabetes and 58% have at least one member with hypertension. Our aim is to design a cost-effective and unobtrusive method (intervention) to encourage the choice of healthier food items without restricting choice and evaluate its effectiveness/efficacy.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Echols, Brittni et al. 2018. "Impact of nutrition rating system on food selection in client-choice food pantries." AEA RCT Registry. September 21. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.3289-1.0
Former Citation
Echols, Brittni et al. 2018. "Impact of nutrition rating system on food selection in client-choice food pantries." AEA RCT Registry. September 21. https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/3289/history/34561
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2018-10-22
Intervention End Date
2018-11-30

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Food items chosen by the clients.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Food pantry clients will be randomly assigned to the control or treatment group.
The treatment group will be nudged before they enter the pantry.
The control group will be provided no information.
Food items selected by the clients will be recorded after checkout
Experimental Design Details
For control group clients
- Provide brief information to the clients about the study.
- Obtain client consent for participating in the study.
- Clients complete the survey.
- Researchers record the food items selected by the clients at/after checkout.

For treatment group clients
- Provide brief information to the clients about the study and the nutritional ranking sheet.
- Obtain client consent for participating in the study
- Clients complete the survey and mark their selection of food items on the nutritional ranking sheet. (Clients are free to select any item from the pantry and are not restricted to their choice marked on the sheet. We will explain this to the clients.)
- Researchers record the food items selected by the clients at/after checkout.
Randomization Method
Randomization done at run time at the place of intervention using a computer.
Randomization Unit
Individual clients will be randomized in treatment and control groups.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
1 food bank
Sample size: planned number of observations
Potential for recruiting 500-1000 food bank clients. This might change per the response rate.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
n/2 clients in control group and n/2 clients in treatment group. n = 500-1000.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number
Analysis Plan

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials