Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Jul 16.
Published in final edited form as: Health Behav Policy Rev. 2020 Oct;7(5):461–472. doi: 10.14485/hbpr.7.5.8

Table 3.

Tray Characteristics of Lunches Rated from Title I Elementary Schools in Central Virginia with and without Salad Bars: Number of Rated Trays, Number (%) of Trays by Sex and Grade and Number (%) of Trays with Fruit and Vegetable Selections

Pair 1 Pair 2 Pair 3

Rated traysa Salad Bar
N = 250
N (%)
Control
N = 321
N (%)
Salad Bar
N = 279
N (%)
Control
N = 214
N (%)
Salad Bar
N = 231
N (%)
Control
N = 264
N (%)
Male 118 (47.2) 149 (46.4) 111 (39.8) 100 (46.7) 120 (52.0) 116 (43.9)

Grade
1 56 (22.4) 55 (17.1) 60 (21.5) 49 (22.9) 50 (21.6) 56 (21.2)
2 52 (20.8) 71 (22.1) 72 (25.8) 22 (10.3) 45 (19.5) 46 (17.4)
3 57 (22.8) 81 (25.2) 65 (23.3) 47 (22.0) 40 (17.3) 44 (16.7)
4 64 (25.6) 50 (15.6) 79 (28.3) 49 (22.9) 48 (20.8) 54 (20.4)
5 21 (8.4) 64 (19.9) 3 (1.1) 47 (22.0) 48 (20.8) 64 (24.2)

Fruitb 79 (31.6) 181 (56.4) 225 (80.6) 93 (43.5) 100 (43.3) 189 (71.6)

Vegetablesc 204 (81.6) 294 (91.6) 241 (86.4) 136 (63.6) 229 (99.1) 41 (15.5)

Note.

Pair refers to matched pairs of schools with and without a salad bar. Pairs were matched based on %Racial/Ethnic minority (above or below 85% minority) and the lunchroom environment (distance from the mean Smarter Lunchroom score). Ratings occurred on the same day within each pair to match menu and day.

a

Trays with a pre and post-consumption image successfully matched and rated.

b

Trays that included a fruit.

c

Trays that included a vegetable.