Search

We have recently been funded by the UK Prevention Research Partnership (UKPRP) to develop a UK school food network. The overarching aim is to build a community working towards a more health-promoting food and nutrition system in UK schools (primary and secondary). Here we describe the current status of school food research, including a review of the literature supporting the health-promoting schools approach and outline the opportunities for intervention and innovation establishment of the network present. Key potential school food research themes are described, and their prioritisation within the network, as well as network activities that have been planned, with the ultimate ambition of reducing socio-economic diet-related inequalities, and, consequently, non-communicable disease risk.

IntroductionExcess free sugar intake is associated with obesity and poor dental health. Adolescents consume substantially more free sugar than is recommended. National (UK) School Food Standards (SFS) are in place but are not mandatory in all schools, and their impact on the diets of secondary school pupils is unknown. We aim to evaluate how SFS and wider healthy eating recommendations (from the national School Food Plan (SFP)) are implemented in secondary schools and how they influence pupils’ diets and dental health.Methods and analysisSecondary-level academies/free schools in the West Midlands, UK were divided into two groups: SFS mandated and SFS non-mandated. Using propensity scores to guide sampling, we aim to recruit 22 schools in each group. We will compare data on school food provision and sales, school food culture and environment, and the food curriculum from each group, collected through: school staff, governor, pupil, parent surveys; school documents; and observation. We will explore the implementation level for the SFS requirements and SFP recommendations and develop a school food typology. We aim to recruit 1980 pupils aged 11–15 years across the 44 schools and collect dietary intake (24-hour recall) and dental health data through self-completion surveys. We will compare free sugar/other dietary intake and dental health across the two SFS groups and across the identified school types. School type will be further characterised in 4–8 case study schools through school staff interviews and pupil focus groups. Evaluation of economic impact will be through a cost-consequence analysis and an exploratory cost–utility analysis.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the University of Birmingham Ethical Review Committee (ERN_18-1738). Findings will be disseminated to key national and local agencies, schools and the public through reports, presentations, the media and open access publications.Trial registration numberISRCTN 68757496 (registered 17 October 2019).

Introduction In September 2009, middle and secondary schools in England were required to comply with food and nutrient-based standards for school food. We examined the impact of this policy change on children’s lunchtime and total dietary intake. Methods We undertook repeat cross-sectional surveys in six Northumberland middle schools in 1999–2000 and 2009–10. Dietary data were collected from 11–12 y olds (n = 298 in 1999–2000; n = 215 in 2009–10). Children completed two consecutive 3-day food diaries, each followed by an interview. Linear mixed effect models examined the effect of year, lunch type and level of socio-economic deprivation on children’s mean total dietary intake. Results We found both before and after the introduction of the food and nutrient-based standards children consuming a school lunch, had a lower per cent energy from saturated fat (−0.5%; p = 0.02), and a lower intake of sodium (−143 mg; p = 0.02), and calcium (−81 mg; p = 0.001) in their total diet, compared with children consuming a home-packed lunch. We found no evidence that lunch type was associated with mean energy, or absolute amounts of NSP, vitamin C and iron intake. There was marginal evidence of an association between lunch type and per cent energy NMES (p = 0.06). In 1999–2000, children consuming a school lunch had a higher per cent energy from fat in their total diet compared with children consuming a home-packed lunch (2.8%), whereas by 2009–10, they had slightly less (−0.2%) (year by lunch type interaction p

In 2005, the nutritional content of children’s school lunches in England was widely criticised, leading to a major policy change in 2006. Food and nutrient-based standards were reintroduced requiring primary schools to comply by September 2008. We aimed to determine the effect of the policy on the nutritional content at lunchtime and in children’s total diet. We undertook a natural experimental evaluation, analysing data from cross-sectional surveys in 12 primary schools in North East England, pre and post policy. Dietary data were collected on four consecutive days from children aged 4–7 years (n = 385 in 2003–4; n = 632 in 2008–9). We used linear mixed effect models to analyse the effects of gender, year, and lunch type on children’s mean total daily intake. Both pre- and post-implementation, children who ate a school lunch consumed less sodium (mean change −128 mg, 95% CI: −183 to −73 mg) in their total diet than children eating home-packed lunches. Post-implementation, children eating school lunches consumed a lower % energy from fat (−1.8%, −2.8 to −0.9) and saturated fat (−1.0%; −1.6 to −0.5) than children eating packed lunches. Children eating school lunches post implementation consumed significantly more carbohydrate (16.4 g, 5.3 to 27.6), protein (3.6 g, 1.1 to 6.0), non-starch polysaccharides (1.5 g, 0.5 to 1.9), vitamin C (0.7 mg, 0.6 to 0.8), and folate (12.3 µg, 9.7 to 20.4) in their total diet than children eating packed lunches. Implementation of school food policy standards was associated with significant improvements in the nutritional content of school lunches; this was reflected in children’s total diet. School food- and nutrient-based standards can play an important role in promoting dietary health and may contribute to tackling childhood obesity. Similar policy measures should be considered for other environments influencing children’s diet.