Fruits and vegetables at home (FLAM): a randomized controlled trial of the impact of fruits and vegetables vouchers in children from low-income families in an urban district of France

Table 1 Sociodemographic characteristics of households at inclusion according to the group (N = 92)

	Control group N = 47		Intervention group N = 45		p value*
	N	%	N	%	p value*
Child female gender	27	57.4	24	53.3	0.69
Child age (years) (mean+/-SD)	6.8	±2.4	8.1	±2.2	0.01
Adult female gender	47	100	44	98	0.3
Adult age (years) (mean+/-SD)	39.3	±8.2	39.8	±6.4	0.72
Single parent household	44	93.6	41	91.1	0.65
Parent’s place of birth
France^†	18	38.3	12	26.7	0.53
Maghreb	11	23.4	16	35.6
Sub-Saharan Africa	14	29.8	13	28,9
Other	4	8.5	4	8.9
Total number of children in household
1	14	29.8	12	26.7	0.84
2	18	38.3	16	35.6
≥ 3	15	31.9	17	37.8
Household’s monthly income (euros) (N = 91)
< 900	13	27.7	16	35.6	0.57
[900–1300[	28	59.6	25	55.6
> 1300	5	10.6	4	8.9
Small FV consumers (< 3.5 servings per day)
Children	31	66.0	28	62.2	0.71
Adults	36	76.6	36	80.0	0.69
Lunch at school	39	86.7	40	88.9	0.75
EPICES Score (mean+/-SD)	54.1	16.1	61.1	16.9	0.05
Proportion of total food budget devoted to FV
< 30%	28	59.6	22	48.9	0.3
≥ 30%	19	40.4	23	51.1	0.3

Abbreviations: EPICES: Deprivation score ranking from 0 (the less precarious situation) to 100 (the most precarious situation). Precarious situation is defined when EPICES score is upper than 30.17, and great precarious situation when the score is upper than 53.84; FV: fruits and vegetables;SD: Standard Deviation;
^*Fisher exact tests were performed for qualitative data and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests were performed for quantitative data
^†Including Metropolitan France and overseas departments
Missing data: Proportion of food budget devoted to FV N = 5 (5.4%), other missing data were less than 5%

ISSN: 1471-2458