Impact of intervention strategies on fruit and vegetable intake in low-, middle- and high-income countries: A scoping review

Vista sencilla de ítem
dc.creatorKoyratty, Nadia
dc.creatorAzupogo, Fusta
dc.creatorSmith, Taryn J.
dc.creatorHinnouho, Guy-Marino
dc.creatorTharaney, Manisha
dc.creatorBliznashka, Lilia
dc.creatorOlney, Deanna K.
dc.creatorHess, Sonja Y.
dc.date2025-09
dc.date2025-07-22T17:29:05Z
dc.date2025-07-22T17:29:05Z
dc.date.accessioned2026-06-27T15:33:33Z
dc.descriptionBackground: Despite well-documented health benefits, fruit and vegetable (F&V) intake remains below recommended levels globally. Objectives: This scoping review aimed to identify effective intervention strategies to increase F&V intake. Methods: We searched PubMed and Web of Science (February 2023) for intervention studies assessing impact on F&V intake. Eligibility criteria included studies published in English since 2012, a valid control group, ≥2 weeks duration, and ≥50 participants per intervention arm. Analysis was done by intervention comparison. Findings were described by summarizing proportion of intervention comparisons reporting statistically significant increases in fruit, vegetable and/or combined F&V intake across standalone (nutrition communication, social protection, agriculture or food environment restructuring) and multi-component strategies. Results: A total of 284 intervention comparisons (223 unique studies) were included. The majority of comparisons (191/284) came from high-income countries (HICs) and 93/284 from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Nutrition communication was the most common standalone strategy, with 121/218 comparisons reporting positive impacts on fruit, vegetable and/or combined F&V intake. Fewer studies evaluated standalone social protection (13/284), food environment restructuring (4/284), or agriculture strategies (3/284). Among the limited interventions, 7/13 social protection and 3/4 food environment restructuring comparisons reported positive impacts, while none of the three standalone agricultural interventions did. Multi-component interventions demonstrated potential with 28/46 comparisons having positive impacts. Conclusions: Some of the intervention strategies showed potential for increasing fruit and/or vegetable intake. However, given the heterogeneity of the interventions, small number of studies for some strategies and limited evidence from LMICs, more rigorous, context-specific research is needed.
dc.identifierhttps://hdl.handle.net/10568/175727
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/123456789/107780
dc.languageen
dc.publisherSAGE Publications
dc.relationhttps://doi.org/10.1177/03795721251314141
dc.rightsOpen Access
dc.sourceKoyratty, Nadia; Azupogo, Fusta; Smith, Taryn J.; Hinnouho, Guy-Marino; Tharaney, Manisha; et al. 2025. Impact of intervention strategies on fruit and vegetable intake in low-, middle- and high-income countries: A scoping review. Food and Nutrition Bulletin 46(1_suppl): S19 - S34. https://doi.org/10.1177/03795721251350208
dc.subjectfruits
dc.subjectvegetables
dc.subjecthealthy diets
dc.subjectliterature reviews
dc.subjectnutrition
dc.titleImpact of intervention strategies on fruit and vegetable intake in low-, middle- and high-income countries: A scoping review
dc.typeJournal Article

Archivos

Colecciones

Instituto Internacional de Investigación sobre Políticas Alimentarias (IFPRI)