We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
To report perspectives of participants in a food benefit programme that includes foods high in added sugar (FAS) restrictions and FAS restrictions paired with fruits and vegetables (F/V) incentives.
Design:
Randomised experimental trial in which participant perspectives were an exploratory study outcome.
Setting:
Participants were randomised into one of three Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)-like food benefit programme groups: (1) restriction: not allowed to buy FAS with benefits; (2) restriction paired with incentive: not allowed to buy FAS with benefits and 30 % financial incentive on eligible F/V purchased using benefits; or (3) control: same food purchasing rules as SNAP. Participants were asked questions to assess programme satisfaction.
Participants:
Adults in the Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN metropolitan area, eligible for but not currently participating in SNAP who completed baseline and follow-up study measures (n 254).
Results:
Among remaining households in each group, most found the programme helpful in buying nutritious foods (88·2 %–95·7 %) and were satisfied with the programme (89·1 %–93·0 %). Sensitivity analysis results indicate that reported helpfulness and satisfaction with the programme may in some instances be lower among the restriction and the restrictions paired with incentive groups in comparison to the control group.
Conclusions:
A food benefit programme that includes restriction on purchase of FAS or restriction paired with a financial incentive for F/V purchases may be acceptable to most SNAP-eligible households with children.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.