Evidence Hub

A cross-sectional study to determine the energy density and nutritional quality of primary-school children’s lunchboxes

R. Sutherland, N. Nathan, A. Brown, Serene Yoong, Renee Reynolds, Alison Walton, Lisa Janssen, Clare Desmet et al.

Public Health Nutrition, 2020

2,143 participants · 29 citations

Abstract

Abstract Objective: The present study describes the energy content of primary-school children’s lunchboxes and the proportion of lunchbox foods considered discretionary. Subgroup analyses by sex, socio-economic status, age and weight status were undertaken. Design: A cross-sectional study was conducted. Mean kilojoule content, number of items and categorisation of foods and drinks in lunchboxes as ‘everyday’ (healthy) or discretionary (sometimes) foods were assessed via a valid and reliable lunchbox observational audit. Setting: Twelve Catholic primary schools (Kindergarten–Grade 6) located in the Hunter region of New South Wales, Australia. Participants: Kindergarten to Grade 6 primary-school students. Results: In total, 2143 children (57 %) had parental consent to have their lunchboxes observed. School lunchboxes contained a mean of 2748 kJ, of which 61·2 % of energy was from foods consistent with the Australian Dietary Guidelines and 38·8 % of energy was discretionary foods. The proportion of lunchboxes containing only healthy foods was 12 %. Children in Kindergarten–Grade 2 packed more servings of ‘everyday’ foods (3·32 v. 2·98, P < 0·01) compared with children in Grades 3–6. Children in Grades 3–6 had a higher percentage of energy from discretionary foods (39·1 v. 33·8 %, P < 0·01) compared with children in Kindergarten–Grade 2 and children from the most socio-economically disadvantaged areas had significantly higher total kilojoules in the school lunchbox compared with…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 2,143 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free