Literature DB >> 28403664

Milk Options Observation (MOO): A Mixed-Methods Study of Chocolate Milk Removal on Beverage Consumption and Student/Staff Behaviors in a Rural Elementary School.

Melinda M Davis1, Margaret Spurlock2, Katrina Ramsey3, Jamie Smith4, Beth Ann Beamer5, Susan Aromaa6, Paul B McGinnis7.   

Abstract

Providing flavored milk in school lunches is controversial, with conflicting evidence on its impact on nutritional intake versus added sugar consumption and excess weight gain. Nonindustry-sponsored studies using individual-level analyses are needed. Therefore, we conducted this mixed-methods study of flavored milk removal at a rural primary school between May and June 2012. We measured beverage selection/consumption pre- and post-chocolate milk removal and collected observation field notes. We used linear and logistic mixed models to assess beverage waste and identified themes in staff and student reactions. Our analysis of data from 315 unique students and 1,820 beverages choices indicated that average added sugar intake decreased by 2.8 g postremoval, while average reductions in calcium and protein consumption were negligible (12.2 mg and 0.3 g, respectively). Five thematic findings emerged, including concerns expressed by adult staff about student rebellion following removal, which did not come to fruition. Removing flavored milk from school-provided lunches may lower students' daily added sugar consumption without considerably decreasing calcium and protein intake and may promote healthy weight.

Entities:  

Keywords:  elementary school; flavored milk; participatory research; rural; school lunch; school nursing

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28403664      PMCID: PMC7314575          DOI: 10.1177/1059840517703744

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Sch Nurs        ISSN: 1059-8405            Impact factor:   2.835


  34 in total

1.  Transitioning from CHIP to CHIRP: blending community health development with community-based participatory research.

Authors:  Paul B McGinnis; Monica Hunsberger; Melinda Davis; Jamie Smith; Beth Ann Beamer; Danna Drum Hastings
Journal:  Fam Community Health       Date:  2010 Jul-Sep

2.  Rural Oregon community perspectives: introducing community-based participatory research into a community health coalition.

Authors:  Julia Young-Lorion; Melinda M Davis; Nancy Kirks; Anna Hsu; Jana Kay Slater; Nancy Rollins; Susan Aromaa; Paul McGinnis
Journal:  Prog Community Health Partnersh       Date:  2013

3.  Sugar-sweetened beverage consumption in the U.S.: novel assessment methodology.

Authors:  Paige E Miller; Robin A McKinnon; Susan M Krebs-Smith; Amy F Subar; Jamie Chriqui; Lisa Kahle; Jill Reedy
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 5.043

4.  Dietary sugars intake and cardiovascular health: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association.

Authors:  Rachel K Johnson; Lawrence J Appel; Michael Brands; Barbara V Howard; Michael Lefevre; Robert H Lustig; Frank Sacks; Lyn M Steffen; Judith Wylie-Rosett
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2009-08-24       Impact factor: 29.690

5.  Increasing caloric contribution from sugar-sweetened beverages and 100% fruit juices among US children and adolescents, 1988-2004.

Authors:  Y Claire Wang; Sara N Bleich; Steven L Gortmaker
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 7.124

6.  Drinking flavored or plain milk is positively associated with nutrient intake and is not associated with adverse effects on weight status in US children and adolescents.

Authors:  Mary M Murphy; Judith S Douglass; Rachel K Johnson; Lisa A Spence
Journal:  J Am Diet Assoc       Date:  2008-04

7.  Explaining the positive relationship between fourth-grade children's body mass index and energy intake at school-provided meals (breakfast and lunch).

Authors:  Caroline H Guinn; Suzanne D Baxter; Julie A Royer; David B Hitchcock
Journal:  J Sch Health       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 2.118

8.  Cost Effectiveness of Childhood Obesity Interventions: Evidence and Methods for CHOICES.

Authors:  Steven L Gortmaker; Michael W Long; Stephen C Resch; Zachary J Ward; Angie L Cradock; Jessica L Barrett; Davene R Wright; Kendrin R Sonneville; Catherine M Giles; Rob C Carter; Marj L Moodie; Gary Sacks; Boyd A Swinburn; Amber Hsiao; Seanna Vine; Jan Barendregt; Theo Vos; Y Claire Wang
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 6.604

9.  Validity of U.S. nutritional surveillance:National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey caloric energy intake data, 1971-2010.

Authors:  Edward Archer; Gregory A Hand; Steven N Blair
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-10-09       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Chocolate milk consequences: a pilot study evaluating the consequences of banning chocolate milk in school cafeterias.

Authors:  Andrew S Hanks; David R Just; Brian Wansink
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-04-16       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  3 in total

1.  Participatory implementation science to increase the impact of evidence-based cancer prevention and control.

Authors:  Shoba Ramanadhan; Melinda M Davis; Rebecca Armstrong; Barbara Baquero; Linda K Ko; Jennifer C Leng; Ramzi G Salloum; Nicole A Vaughn; Ross C Brownson
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2018-02-07       Impact factor: 2.506

2.  The Evolving Collaborative Relationship between Practice-Based Research Networks (PBRNs) and Clinical and Translational Science Awardees (CTSAs).

Authors:  Maureen Riley-Behringer; Melinda M Davis; James J Werner; L J Fagnan; Kurt C Stange
Journal:  J Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2017-12-28

3.  Effect of Removing Chocolate Milk on Milk and Nutrient Intake Among Urban Secondary School Students.

Authors:  Hannah R Thompson; Lorrene Ritchie; Esther Park; Kristine A Madsen; Wendi Gosliner
Journal:  Prev Chronic Dis       Date:  2020-08-27       Impact factor: 2.830

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.