Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Aug 29;2(2):e11235.
doi: 10.2196/11235.

Incorporating Technology Into the iCook 4-H Program, a Cooking Intervention for Adults and Children: Randomized Controlled Trial

Sarah Colby #  1 , Lauren Moret, Melissa D Olfert  2 , Kendra Kattelmann  3 , Lisa Franzen-Castle  4 , Kristin Riggsbee  1 , Magen Payne  1 , Ainsley Ellington  1 , Cary Springer  5 , Chelsea Allison  1 , Sa'Nealdra Wiggins  1 , Rochelle Butler  5 , Douglas Mathews  6 , Adrienne A White  7
Affiliations

Incorporating Technology Into the iCook 4-H Program, a Cooking Intervention for Adults and Children: Randomized Controlled Trial

Sarah Colby et al. JMIR Pediatr Parent. .

Abstract

Background: Families who cook, eat, and play together have been found to have more positive health outcomes. Interventions are needed that effectively increase these health-related behaviors. Technology is often incorporated in health-related interventions but is not always independently assessed.

Objective: The objective of this study was to describe challenges and facilitators to incorporating technology into the iCook 4-H intervention program.

Methods: Dyads (n=228) composed of children (mean 9.4, SD 0.7 years old) and an adult primary meal preparer (mean 39.0, SD 8 years) were randomly assigned to a control (n=77) or treatment group (n=151). All treatment group dyads participated in 6 in-person sessions designed to increase families cooking, eating, and playing together. We incorporated Web-based between-session technological components related to the curriculum content throughout the intervention. Assessments were completed by both groups at baseline and at 4, 12, and 24 months; they included measured anthropometrics for children, and online surveys about camera and website skill and use for dyads. Session leaders and participants completed open-ended process evaluations after each session about technological components. We computed chi-square analysis for sex differences in technological variables. We tested relationships between video posting frequency and outcomes of interest (cooking frequency, self-efficacy, and skills; dietary intake; and body mass index) with Spearman correlations. Process evaluations and open-ended survey responses were thematically analyzed for beneficial and inhibiting factors, including technological components in the curriculum.

Results: Only 78.6% (81/103) of children and 68.3% (71/104) of adults reported always being comfortable accessing the internet postintervention. Boys reported being more comfortable than girls with technological tasks (P<.05). Children who posted more videos had a higher level of cooking skills at 4 months postintervention (r=.189, P=.05). Barriers to website usage reported most frequently by children were lack of accessibility, remembering, interactivity, motivation, time, and lack of parental encouragement.

Conclusions: Incorporating technological supports, such as cameras and websites, into children's programs may help produce improved outcomes. Identifying barriers to and patterns of technology usage need to be considered when developing future child health promotion interventions.

Trial registration: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN54135351; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN54135351.

Keywords: child health; cooking; intervention; technology; videos.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
iCook intervention study participation flow diagram.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Banfield EC, Liu Y, Davis JS, Chang S, Frazier-Wood AC. Poor adherence to US dietary guidelines for children and adolescents in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey population. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2016 Jan;116(1):21–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jand.2015.08.010. http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/26391469 S2212-2672(15)01259-9 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Marshall S, Burrows T, Collins CE. Systematic review of diet quality indices and their associations with health-related outcomes in children and adolescents. J Hum Nutr Diet. 2014 Dec;27(6):577–98. doi: 10.1111/jhn.12208. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Haapala EA, Eloranta A, Venäläinen T, Schwab U, Lindi V, Lakka TA. Associations of diet quality with cognition in children - the Physical Activity and Nutrition in Children Study. Br J Nutr. 2015 Oct 14;114(7):1080–7. doi: 10.1017/S0007114515001634.S0007114515001634 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kulkarni AA, Swinburn BA, Utter J. Associations between diet quality and mental health in socially disadvantaged New Zealand adolescents. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2015 Jan;69(1):79–83. doi: 10.1038/ejcn.2014.130.ejcn2014130 - DOI - PubMed
    1. McMartin SE, Willows ND, Colman I, Ohinmaa A, Storey K, Veugelers PJ. Diet quality and feelings of worry, sadness or unhappiness in Canadian children. Can J Public Health. 2013 Jul 25;104(4):e322–6. - PMC - PubMed