Table 6.
Associations of Advertising Policies and Price Incentives for Healthy Foods with Student Eating Behaviors in Minnesota Schools, 2010†
| Banned advertising score | Price incentives for healthy foods | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| β‡ (95% CI) | p | Estimated Difference∥ (95% CI) | p | |
| All students (school N = 206) | ||||
| Sugar-sweetened beverages | 0.03 (−0.01, 0.07) | .20 | −0.08 (−0.25, 0.08) | .34 |
| Fruits and/or vegetables | −0.01 (−0.03, 0.02) | .60 | 0.05 (−0.04, 0.13) | .29 |
| Boys (school N = 206) | ||||
| Sugar-sweetened beverages | 0.01 (−0.04, 0.06) | .69 | −0.13 (−0.34, 0.08) | .21 |
| Fruits and/or vegetables | −0.01 (−0.03, 0.02) | .66 | 0.09 (−0.02, 0.20) | .11 |
| Girls (school N = 206) | ||||
| Sugar-sweetened beverages | 0.04 (−0.02, 0.10) | .18 | −0.07 (−0.30, 0.16) | .56 |
| Fruits and/or vegetables | 0.00 (−0.03, 0.03) | .98 | 0.01 (−0.10, 0.11) | .88 |
| 6th grade students (school N = 57) | ||||
| Sugar-sweetened beverages | 0.06 (−0.04, 0.17) | .24 | −0.14 (−0.53, 0.24) | .47 |
| Fruits and/or vegetables | 0.02 (−0.03, 0.07) | .39 | 0.03 (−0.13, 0.20) | .69 |
| 9th grade students (school N = 146) | ||||
| Sugar-sweetened beverages | 0.02 (−0.02, 0.07) | .34 | −0.02 (−0.21, 0.16) | .80 |
| Fruits and/or vegetables | −0.01 (−0.04, 0.02) | .55 | 0.01 (−0.13, 0.15) | .86 |
| 12th grade students (school N = 145) | ||||
| Sugar-sweetened beverages | 0.03 (−0.04, 0.09) | .42 | −0.15 (−0.43, 0.12) | .27 |
| Fruits and/or vegetables | −0.01 (−0.05, 0.02) | .37 | 0.14 (0.01, 0.27) | .03 |
‡
β is the change in school-level mean servings (95% confidence interval) for each additional banned marketing location.
∥
Estimated difference (95% confidence interval) represents the difference in school-level mean servings between schools that implemented price incentives and those schools not implementing the strategy.