Table 1.
Descriptive Characteristics of Articles Reviewed.
| First author (date) |
Design | Study purpose | Population/setting | Duration (frequency) |
Interventionist | Format | Assessment/measures | Study findings related to psychosocial outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cooking intervention details | ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
| Barak-Nahum (2016) | Two-group comparison intervention with waitlist control | Examination of culinary group intervention on health-related quality of life and well-being | Adult cancer patients from Israeli community cancer center (intervention n = 96, 90 female; control n = 88, female 80) | 10 weeks (weekly) | Nutritionist and mental health professional | Sessions involved brainstorming, nutrition topic and shared meal with mental health– related discussion Meals based on American Cancer Society recipes |
Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PNAS) Short Form 12 (SF12) Intuitive Eating Scale (IES) 24-hour recall (RECALL-24) |
Compared with controls, intervention group had significant improvement in negative affect (p = .004) and HRQOL (p = .005) Impact of the intervention on HRQOL was mediated by healthy food choices (RECALL-24) (p = .05) Impact of the intervention on negative and positive affect was mediated by Intuitive eating (p = .05; p = .01, respectively) and healthy food choices (p = .001; p = .001, respectively) |
| Crawford (1997) | Mixed methods | Evaluation of community kitchens program | Adult low-income participants in British Columbia community kitchen (n = 23 female) | 24 months (monthly) | Community worker and nutritionist | Orientation meeting and supermarket tour then cooking groups with menu planning, shopping, and food preparation for 4 to 5 entrees to take home and share | Pre- and postprogram questionnaire administered by staff addressing perceived benefits and barriers to participation and to obtaining healthy food | Postprogram, 57% of participants reported that socialization was a benefit of participation; up by 12% from preprogram beliefs |
| Engler-Stringer (2007) | Qualitative | Evaluation of social benefits of collective kitchens | Community-based adults from 21 kitchens in three Canadian cities (n = 20, gender not provided) | At least 4 months (not provided) | Community facilitator | Details of individual collective kitchen groups not provided | Individual interviews with participants examining the processes that occurred during collective kitchen planning and cooking sessions and how the experience of participation influenced everyday lives | Participants reported collective kitchens: Helped social relationships flourish Provided opportunities to socialize Reduced social isolation |
| Fitzsimmons (2003) | Randomized control trial with waitlist control group | Evaluation of participation in therapeutic cooking program in older adults with dementia | Elderly females with dementia living in a residential facility (n = 12 females) | 10 days (daily) | Recreational therapist | Two days of meal planning and shopping followed by three days of cooking sessions Cooking recipes and tasks were adapted to participant ability | Cohen–Mansfield Agitation Inventory Passivity in Dementia Scale |
Compared with controls, those in intervention group had significant improvements in agitation (p = .00) and passivity (p = .00) |
| Haley (2004) | Qualitative | Examination of mental health users’ views of engaging in baking | Adult mental health inpatients (n = 12, 2 female) | Not provided (average of 2 sessions) | Occupational therapist | Details not provided | Semistructured interviews assessing participants’ understanding of cooking group’s therapeutic goals, purpose, and structure; participant’s perspectives on the baking group experience | Participants reported baking groups helped: Increased concentration Improved coordination Built confidence Provided a sense of achievement |
| Herbert (2014)a | Two-group comparison design (intervention/waitlist control) using mixed methods | Examination of impact of a cooking program on cooking behaviors as well as social and health benefits | Community- dwelling Australian adults (intervention n = 694, female 525; control n = 237 female 198) | 10 weeks (weekly) | Program facilitators | 90-Minute groups based on learning cooking skills using fresh ingredients on a budget Shared meal at the end of session and meal for two to take home to share |
Rosenberg Global Self Esteem Scale Researcher-developed 5-point Likert-type scale to assess cooking self-efficacy (based on previously validated tools) Semistructured qualitative interviews explored impact of program on attitudes and behaviors |
Compared with control group, intervention group had significant improvements in global self-esteem from baseline to intervention conclusion (p = .02) Within intervention group, global self-esteem remained steady from conclusion to 6 months post intervention (p = .26) Participants reported more social interactions at home, including working as a household team to prepare meals |
| Hill (2007) | Mixed methods | Evaluation of therapeutic efficacy of a cooking group for burn survivors | Hospitalized adult burn patients (n = 27, 9 female) | Not provided (weekly) | Occupational therapist | Kitchen area of Rehab gym Participants cooked meal and were assigned tasks per ability level Shared meal at the end of each cooking session |
Investigator-designed 5-point Likert-type questionnaire assessed: anxiety, burn preoccupation, peer interaction, and mobility/standing tolerance Open-ended qualitative question assessed general feelings about the cooking group |
78% Strongly agreed or agreed that cooking distracted them from thinking about burns 78% strongly agreed or agreed that cooking helped them meet other people 48% strongly agreed or agreed that they experienced less anxiety in the kitchen |
| Jyväkorpi (2014) | Single-group intervention study | Evaluation of impact of nutrition education and cooking classes on diet quality, nutrient intake, and psychological Well-being | Healthy elderly individuals from Helsinki, Finland (n = 54, 49 female) | Not provided | Nutritionist and professional cooking instructor | Three sessions, conducted at community center, consisted of 1 hour of nutrition education followed by 3 hours of cooking class. Recipes and ingredients were provided | Six validated questions assessing Psychological well-being (PWB) | Participants had significant improvements in PWB from baseline to 4 months postintervention (p = .02) |
| Lee (2010) | Qualitative | Process evaluation of community kitchens | Participants from 11 community kitchens in Australia (n = 52, gender not provided) | Not provided (not provided) | Community facilitator | Details of each community kitchen not provided | Participant focus groups assessed participants’ perceptions about community kitchens | Participants reported that groups: Helped develop social skills Provided an outlet to socialize and enjoy the company of others Provided an enjoyable way to help each other in the kitchen and share information with others helped improve confidence and interpersonal skills |
| Marquis (2001) | Mixed methods | Evaluation of community kitchen programs | Community kitchen participants in British Columbia (n = 24, gender not provided) | 20 weeks (weekly) | Peer counselor | Initial session provided instruction on menu planning, self-esteem, team building On alternating weeks, groups of 4 to 5 met to cook together At conclusion, participants were encouraged to recruit friends and family to cook together at home at least 5 times within 10 weeks |
Periodic survey and focus group with participants | Socialization was a benefit of cooking kitchens Four months after completion, 80% of participants were facilitating their own cooking group After 8 months, 50% of participants were still cooking in groups |
| Tarasuk (1999) | Qualitative | Examination of the potential of community kitchens to enhance food security in population with constrained resources | Low-income participants in 6 Canadian community kitchens (n = 14, 13 female) | 4 months to 5 years (bimonthly) | Community facilitator | First sessions spent planning menu and shopping list Subsequent sessions spent preparing 4–5 main dishes that were taken home |
Qualitative interviews to assess potential of program to affect income-related food insecurity | Socialization cited as a benefit Groups contributed to a sense of “not being alone” |
a
Two methods articles were published related to this study that provided information regarding recruitment (Flego et al., 2014) and measurement tools (Flego et al., 2013) that are cited in this table.