Table 2c. Evaluation Methods Used by Interventions on Prepared-Food Sources, by Type of Intervention: Interventions Conducted in Small Local Restaurants^a .

Characteristic	Shape Up Somerville (32–36)	Smart Menu Program (37,38)	The Healthy Options Program (39–42)
Study design	Quasi-experimental; nonexperimental for restaurant portion of intervention; intervention trial, voluntary participation (n = 21)	Nonexperimental; pre–post assessment; intervention trial, voluntary participation; no comparison group (n = 6)	Nonexperimental; pre–post assessment (n = 4)
Feasibility assessment measuresb	Environmental change assessment; owners’ compliance and perceived impact	Interviews with restaurant owners or managers	Interviews with owner and staff
Process evaluation measuresc	Extensive process evaluation; participation and adherence to intervention elements	Observation of nutrition information being posted	None
Prepared-food source impact measures	Owner survey (menu changes, sales, nutrition awareness)	Sales	Sales
Consumer impact measuresd	None for restaurant intervention; assessment at child and household level (change in body mass index)	Awareness; behavior	Awareness; behavior

^a Includes small, locally owned “mom-and-pop” establishments that include but are not limited to take-out and sit-down restaurants and restaurants that focused on specialty foods; it excludes chain restaurants.

^b Feasibility assessment measures include acceptability, operability, and perceived sustainability.

^c Process evaluation measures include dose, reach, and fidelity, which indicate how well the program was implemented according to plan.

^d Consumer impact measures included psychosocial, behavioral, and health outcomes.