Skip to main content

Table 4 Implementation of A pleasant eating environment : assessed at the individual-, school- and class level

From: Implementation of strategies to increase adolescents’ access to fruit and vegetables at school: process evaluation findings from the Boost study

Process evaluation concept Source and timing of data collection
Teacher midway survey Teacher follow-up survey Pupil follow-up survey
Individual level average implementation level (A) No of schools ≥80% implementation/out of all responding schools Individual level average implementation level (A) No of schools ≥80% implementation/out of all responding schools Individual level average implementation level (A) No of schools ≥80% implementation/out of all responding schools No of classes ≥80% implementation/out of all classes
Fidelity/Dose delivered
FV are cut up in the teachers' lessons (every time/most times) 49% (0-100%) 6/19 55% (0-100%) 8/19    
Boost coordinators 47%   47%     
Other teachers 50%   58%     
How often the Boost FV were cut up      60% (A: 28-91%, B: 11-100%) 5/20 15/55
FV are usually cut up by:
Each pupil    11% (0-100%)     
Designated FV hosts    52% (0-100%)     
Other pupils    19% (0-67%)     
Teachers    18% (0-100%)     
Dose received
Time is allocated for the pupils to eat FV in class      68% (A: 40-93%, B: 24-100% ) 5/20 21/55
The pupils are having a good time while eating Boost FV together    83% (0-100%) 14/20 54% (A: 35-72%, B: 21-90%) 0/20 7/55
Reach of intervention among subgroups
The pupils are having a good time while eating Boost FV together
High SEP      55%   
Medium SEP      50%   
Low SEP      63% (P = 0.0212)   
Girls      59%   
Boys      50% (P = 0.0054)   
  1. A: School range: minimum and maximum percentage of teachers/pupils identified across schools.
  2. B: Class range: minimum and maximum percentage of pupils identified across schools.
  3. FV: fruit and vegetables.
  4. SEP: socioeconomic position.