- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT04038385
WIC-Based Intervention to Promote Healthy Eating Among Low-Income Mothers
November 24, 2021 updated by: Jennifer Di Noia, William Paterson University of New Jersey
Whole grains, non-starchy vegetables, fruit, and beans are a consistent feature of diets associated with a lower risk of cancer and other diet-related diseases.
For cancer risk reduction, the American Cancer Society recommendation is to consume at least 2.5 cups of a variety of fruits and vegetables daily.
Other than dietary choices, weight control and physical activity levels are important modifiable determinants of cancer risk.
This study finalized a novel, theory-driven farm-to-WIC intervention developed in preliminary work to promote vegetable intake among low-income adults served by the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC).
In New Jersey (the location of the study), WIC provides participants up to $30 in seasonal Farmers' Market Nutrition Program (FMNP) vouchers and monthly cash value vouchers or CVV (valued at $11 for adults and $8 for children at the time of the study) redeemable at farmers' markets.
The program combined behaviorally focused nutrition education with the establishment of a WIC-based farmers' market (implemented in the summer of 2019 during the FMNP voucher issuance period).
Content to address other modifiable determinants of cancer risk was added.
To create additional opportunities for experiential and hands-on learning, monthly trips to an area farmers' market were held (between September 1, 2019 [after the WIC-based market was discontinued] and November 30, 2019 [the end of the local growing season]).
The research employed an experimental design to initially test the intervention in 3 WIC agency sites (1 intervention and 2 control sites) with 297 urban, primarily Hispanic adults.
Program effects on primary outcomes of vegetable intake (measured objectively using dermal carotenoids as a biomarker of intake and via self-report) and FMNP voucher redemption (objectively assessed using data provided by WIC) were examined at mid- and post-intervention (3 and 6 months post-baseline, respectively).
Intervention effects on potential hypothesized mediators and the redemption of CVV at farmers' markets, participant satisfaction with the program, and the cost-effectiveness of the intervention also were examined.
Study Overview
Status
Completed
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Study Type
Interventional
Enrollment (Actual)
297
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.
Study Locations
-
-
New Jersey
-
Paterson, New Jersey, United States, 07524
- Saint Joseph's WIC Program
-
-
Participation Criteria
Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
18 years to 99 years (Adult, Older Adult)
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Yes
Genders Eligible for Study
All
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- English- or Spanish-speaking
- Farmers' Market Nutrition Program (FMNP) voucher recipient or caregiver of a child FMNP voucher recipient
- Not less than 3 months from expected delivery date (pregnant women)
- Eligible to receive WIC benefits for 6 months after study entry
Exclusion Criteria:
● Restrictions of food intake (has food allergies or foods that cannot be eaten)
Study Plan
This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Prevention
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Double
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Intervention
This group will receive routine services provided by WIC and an intervention that will combine behaviorally-focused nutrition education with 1) the establishment of a WIC-based farmers' market (implemented in 2019 during the WIC Farmers' Market Nutrition Program voucher issuance period [June 19 to August 19]), and 2) monthly trips to an area farmers' market (between September 1, 2019 and November 30, 2019 [the end of the local growing season]).
|
Behaviorally-focused intervention grounded in the Social Ecological Model and Social Cognitive Theory to promote vegetable intake and the redemption of seasonal Farmers' Market Nutrition Program vouchers and monthly Cash Value Vouchers at farmers' markets.
|
|
No Intervention: Control
This group will receive routine services provided by WIC only.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Vegetable Intake Carotenoid Scores at 3 Months
Time Frame: 3 months
|
Vegetable intake was objectively assessed using a reflection spectroscopy device (the Veggie Meter) to measure the level of carotenoid pigments in participants' skin (scores can range from 0 to 800).
Higher scores indicate a better outcomes (higher carotenoid levels).
|
3 months
|
|
Vegetable Intake Carotenoid Scores at 6 Months
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Vegetable intake was objectively assessed using a reflection spectroscopy device (the Veggie Meter) to measure the level of carotenoid pigments in participants' skin (scores can range from 0 to 800).
Higher scores indicate a better outcomes (higher carotenoid levels).
|
6 months
|
|
Self-Reported Vegetable Intake at 3 Months
Time Frame: 3 months
|
Assessed with one of two items in a screening instrument developed by the National Cancer Institute.
Participants reported the number of cups of vegetables (including 100% vegetable juice) they ate or drank each day (range 0-7).
Higher numbers represent a better outcome (higher cups/day of vegetables consumed).
|
3 months
|
|
Self-Reported Vegetable Intake at 6 Months
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Assessed with one of two items in a screening instrument developed by the National Cancer Institute.
Participants reported the number of cups of vegetables (including 100% vegetable juice) they ate or drank each day (range 0-7).
Higher numbers represent a better outcome (higher cups/day of vegetables consumed).
|
6 months
|
|
Number of Participants Who Redeemed Any Farmers' Market Nutrition Program (FMNP) Vouchers at 6 Months
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Objectively assessed using data provided by the collaborating WIC agency.
WIC reported whether participants redeemed any FMNP vouchers (yes or no) from baseline to 6 months.
|
6 months
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Knowledge of Vegetable Intake Recommendations at 3 Months
Time Frame: 3 months
|
Assessed via self-report with an item from the National Cancer Institute's Food, Attitudes, and Behaviors (FAB) survey.
Based on their responses, participants were classified as knowledgeable of the recommended cups per day (yes or no).
|
3 months
|
|
Knowledge of Vegetable Intake Recommendations at 6 Months
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Assessed via self-report with an item from the National Cancer Institute's Food, Attitudes, and Behaviors (FAB) survey.
Based on their responses, participants were classified as knowledgeable of the recommended cups per day (yes or no).
|
6 months
|
|
Home Vegetable Availability (Quantity) at 3 Months
Time Frame: 3 months
|
Assessed with items from the Healthy Home Survey.
Participants reported the number of fresh, frozen, and canned vegetables they had at home.
Responses were summed across items to derive a total score (range 0-23).
Higher scores indicate a better outcome (a higher number of vegetables at home).
|
3 months
|
|
Home Vegetable Availability (Quantity) at 6 Months
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Assessed with items from the Healthy Home Survey.
Participants reported the number of fresh, frozen, and canned vegetables they had at home.
Responses were summed across items to derive a total score (range 0-23).
Higher scores indicate a better outcome (a higher number of vegetables at home).
|
6 months
|
|
Home Vegetable Availability (Variety) at 3 Months
Time Frame: 3 months
|
Assessed with items from the Healthy Home Survey.
Participants reported the number of fresh, frozen, and canned vegetables they had at home.
The number of different (unique) vegetables reported was summed across items to derive a total score (range 0-21).
Higher scores indicate a better outcome (a greater variety of vegetables at home).
|
3 months
|
|
Home Vegetable Availability (Variety) at 6 Months
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Assessed with items from the Healthy Home Survey.
Participants reported the number of fresh, frozen, and canned vegetables they had at home.
The number of different (unique) vegetables reported was summed to derive a total score (range 0-21).
Higher scores indicate a better outcome (a greater variety of vegetables at home).
|
6 months
|
|
Vegetable Taste Preferences at 3 Months
Time Frame: 3 months
|
Assessed with a single item (the Preference Rating Measure) querying overall, how much the participant likes the taste of vegetables (on a 7-point scale ranging from not at all to a lot).
Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (stronger vegetable taste preferences).
|
3 months
|
|
Vegetable Taste Preferences at 6 Months
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Assessed with a single item (the Preference Rating Measure) querying overall, how much the participant likes the taste of vegetables (on a 7-point scale ranging from not at all to a lot).
Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (stronger vegetable taste preferences).
|
6 months
|
|
Vegetable Preparation Practices at 3 Months
Time Frame: 3 months
|
Assessed via items from the Eating Among Teens and Young Adults Study (EAT)-II Survey (Laska et al., 2011).
Participants reported how often, in the past month, they 1) bought fresh vegetables, 2) prepared a vegetable salad, and 3) prepared a dinner with vegetables.
Responses were on a 5-point scale ranging from never to more than once a week.
Ratings were summed across items to derive a total score.
Scores can range from 1 to 15.
Higher scores represent a better outcome (frequent use of the practices).
|
3 months
|
|
Vegetable Preparation Practices at 6 Months
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Assessed via items from the Eating Among Teens and Young Adults Study (EAT)-II Survey (Laska et al., 2011).
Participants reported how often, in the past month, they 1) bought fresh vegetables, 2) prepared a vegetable salad, and 3) prepared a dinner with vegetables.
Responses were on a 5-point scale ranging from never to more than once a week.
Ratings were summed across items to derive a total score.
Scores can range from 1 to 15.
Higher scores represent a better outcome (frequent use of the practices).
|
6 months
|
|
Vegetable Preparation Skills at 3 Months
Time Frame: 3 months
|
Assessed via a single item (the Preparation Skills Rating Measure) querying how the participant would rate his or her overall skill in preparing vegetables (on a 7-point scale ranging from poor to excellent).
Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater vegetable preparation skills).
|
3 months
|
|
Vegetable Preparation Skills at 6 Months
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Assessed via a single item (the Preparation Skills Rating Measure) querying how the participant would rate his or her overall skill in preparing vegetables (on a 7-point scale ranging from poor to excellent).
Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater vegetable preparation skills).
|
6 months
|
|
Social Support for Vegetable Consumption at 3 Months
Time Frame: 3 months
|
Assessed via a single item (the Social Support Rating Measure) querying how much others support the participant to consume vegetables (on a 7-point scale ranging from not at all to a lot).
Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater social support for vegetable consumption).
|
3 months
|
|
Social Support for Vegetable Consumption at 6 Months
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Assessed via a single item (the Social Support Rating Measure) querying how much others support the participant to consume vegetables (on a 7-point scale ranging from not at all to a lot).
Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater social support for vegetable consumption).
|
6 months
|
|
Self-efficacy for Vegetable Consumption at 3 Months
Time Frame: 3 months
|
Assessed with a validated measure used to evaluate the Stellar Farmers' Market program (Dannefer et al., 2015).
Participants rated how much they agreed or disagreed with statements designed to measure confidence in the ability to prepare and consume fresh produce.
Item ratings are on a 4-point scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (4).
Ratings were summed across items to derive a total score.
Scores can range from 5 to 20.
Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater self-efficacy for vegetable consumption).
|
3 months
|
|
Self-efficacy for Vegetable Consumption at 6 Months
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Assessed with a validated measure used to evaluate the Stellar Farmers' Market program (Dannefer et al., 2015).
Participants rated how much they agreed or disagreed with statements designed to measure confidence in the ability to prepare and consume fresh produce.
Item ratings are on a 4-point scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (4).
Ratings were summed across items to derive a total score.
Scores can range from 5 to 20.
Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater self-efficacy for vegetable consumption).
|
6 months
|
|
Body Mass Index at 3 Months
Time Frame: 3 months
|
Height and weight were measured by trained research staff with participants wearing light clothing without shoes.
Body mass index was calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in square meters.
|
3 months
|
|
Body Mass Index at 6 Months
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Height and weight were measured by trained research staff with participants wearing light clothing without shoes.
Body mass index was calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in square meters.
|
6 months
|
|
Number of Participants Who Met Physical Activity Guidelines at 3 Months
Time Frame: 3 months
|
Assessed with a validated 2-item measure (the Brief Physical Activity Assessment Tool or BPAAT [Marshall et al., 2005]).
The instrument consists of two questions, one that assesses the frequency and duration of vigorous intensity physical activity and one that assesses the frequency and duration of moderate intensity physical activity undertaken in a usual week.
A scoring algorithm is used to derive a total score (scores can range from 0 to 8).
Participants are classified as meeting current physical activity guidelines (yes or no) based on the scores (a score greater than or equal to 4 indicates that the participant is meeting current physical activity guidelines, whereas a score between 0 and 3 indicates that the participant is not).
|
3 months
|
|
Number of Participants Who Met Physical Activity Guidelines at 6 Months
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Assessed with a validated 2-item measure (the Brief Physical Activity Assessment Tool or BPAAT [Marshall et al., 2005]).
The instrument consists of two questions, one that assesses the frequency and duration of vigorous intensity physical activity and one that assesses the frequency and duration of moderate intensity physical activity undertaken in a usual week.
A scoring algorithm is used to derive a total score (scores can range from 0 to 8).
Participants are classified as meeting current physical activity guidelines (yes/no) based on the scores (a score greater than or equal to 4 indicates that the participant is meeting current physical activity guidelines, whereas a score between 0 and 3 indicates that the participant is not).
|
6 months
|
Other Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants Who Redeemed Any Cash Value Vouchers or CVV at Farmers' Markets at 6 Months
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Objectively assessed using data provided by the collaborating WIC agency.
WIC reported whether participants redeemed any cash value vouchers at farmers' markets (yes or no) between baseline and 6 months.
|
6 months
|
|
Overall Satisfaction With Intervention
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Assessed via a single item (the Overall Satisfaction Rating Measure) querying how satisfied intervention recipients were with the intervention (on a 7-point scale ranging from very dissatisfied to very satisfied).
Scores can range from 1 to 7. Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater overall satisfaction).
|
6 months
|
|
Satisfaction With Intervention
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Assessed with a 5-item measure developed by the investigators querying how satisfied intervention recipients were with the intervention.
Item responses were on a 7-point scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree.
Scores were averaged across items to derive a total score.
Scores can range from 1 to7.
Higher scores represent a better outcome (greater satisfaction with the intervention).
|
6 months
|
Collaborators and Investigators
This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Jennifer Di Noia, PhD, William Paterson University
Publications and helpful links
The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.
General Publications
- Di Noia J, Gellermann W. Use of the Spectroscopy-Based Veggie Meter(R) to Objectively Assess Fruit and Vegetable Intake in Low-Income Adults. Nutrients. 2021 Jun 30;13(7):2270. doi: 10.3390/nu13072270.
- Di Noia J, Monica D, Jensen HH, Sikorskii A. Economic evaluation of a farm-to-Special Supplemental Nutrition Programme for Women, Infants and Children intervention promoting vegetable consumption. Public Health Nutr. 2021 Aug;24(12):3922-3928. doi: 10.1017/S1368980021001981. Epub 2021 May 11.
- Di Noia J, Monica D, Sikorskii A, Nelson J. Pilot Study of a Farm-to-Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) Intervention Promoting Vegetable Consumption. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2021 Oct;121(10):2035-2045. doi: 10.1016/j.jand.2020.12.020. Epub 2021 Jan 22.
- Di Noia J, Monica D, Sikorskii A. Process Evaluation of a Farm-to-WIC Intervention. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2021 Oct;121(10):2021-2034. doi: 10.1016/j.jand.2021.05.014. Epub 2021 Jun 16.
Study record dates
These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
June 3, 2019
Primary Completion (Actual)
January 31, 2020
Study Completion (Actual)
August 31, 2021
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
July 14, 2019
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
July 27, 2019
First Posted (Actual)
July 30, 2019
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
December 23, 2021
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
November 24, 2021
Last Verified
November 1, 2021
More Information
Terms related to this study
Other Study ID Numbers
- 1R21CA230476-01 (U.S. NIH Grant/Contract)
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
No
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Diet Modification
-
University of Rhode IslandCompletedDiet Modification | Diet HabitUnited States
-
University of ReadingCompletedDiet Modification | Diet, Healthy | Diet HabitUnited Kingdom
-
University of Rhode IslandBrown University; University of ConnecticutCompletedDiet ModificationUnited States
-
Purdue UniversityCompletedDiet ModificationUnited States
-
Quadram Institute BioscienceNorfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustCompleted
-
Loma Linda UniversityArdmore Institute of HealthCompleted
-
University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation...Medical Research Council; University of SouthamptonCompleted
-
Sibylle Kranz, PhD, RDNRecruitingDiet ModificationUnited States
-
University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation...Medical Research Council; University of Southampton; National Institute for Health... and other collaboratorsActive, not recruitingDiet ModificationUnited Kingdom
Clinical Trials on Multilevel Behavioral Intervention
-
Adaliene Versiani M. FerreiraConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico; Fundacion MAPFRECompleted
-
Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine,...Recruiting
-
VA Office of Research and DevelopmentVA Pittsburgh Healthcare System; Fargo VA Medical Center; VA Madison Health Care and other collaboratorsRecruitingCancers of the Lung | Advanced Cancers of the ProstateUnited States
-
Temple UniversityNational Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD)Completed
-
Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center...National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD)RecruitingMultilevel Intervention for LDCT Lung Cancer Screening and Smoking Cessation Among African AmericansSmoking Cessation | Tobacco Use Disorder | Lung Cancer ScreeningUnited States
-
UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer CenterNational Cancer Institute (NCI)RecruitingSolid Tumor | Hematologic MalignancyUnited States
-
Rhode Island HospitalEmory University; Boston Medical Center; University of Mississippi Medical CenterCompletedHIV/AIDS | Medication AdherenceUnited States
-
San Diego State UniversityTerminated
-
The University of Texas Health Science Center at...National Institute on Aging (NIA)Active, not recruitingType 2 DiabetesUnited States
-
Rhode Island HospitalRecruiting