LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Seddon, Christina
Languages: English
Types: Doctoral thesis
Subjects:

Classified by OpenAIRE into

mesheuropmc: digestive, oral, and skin physiology
ABSTRACT\ud \ud Background: Many studies have highlighted the benefits of good nutrition for improved cognitive performance and educational outcomes (Hoyland et al, 2008). The recognition that children’s diets were nutritionally inadequate, led to the re-introduction of statutory nutritional standards in 2001 (Nelson et al, 2004). However, lack of enforcement, led to revised Government Nutrient Based Standards (GNBS), with the recommendation that primary schools comply with regulations by 2008. The purpose of this research was to evaluate whether school meal provision in Lancashire primary schools, is meeting GNBS, 2007, and secondly, whether a mid-morning snack has an impact on the cognitive performance of primary school children.\ud Methods: One Lancashire primary school was selected as a representation of 525 primary schools across Lancashire that receives nutrition provision from Lancashire County Council Commercial Group (LCCG). School meals were collected on a daily bases over 3 weeks, and prepared for laboratory analysis. The nutritional composition of the school meals were analysed using both direct chemical analysis and indirect food composition database analysis. One-sample t-tests were conducted to compare the mean differences derived from both analyses per meal, with GNBS. For the second phase, 21 children (aged 6-7) from the same school participated in a short memory test on two occasions, test 1 before a mid-morning snack, and test 2 after a mid-morning snack, to assess cognitive performance.\ud Results: Chemical and database analyses revealed the energy content of the LCCG school meals were significantly below the minimum GNBS of 530 kcal, 5% per meal (chemical: 392 ± 72 kcal/meal, database: 411 ± 44 kcal/meal). Mean total fat values (chemical: 8.28 ± 2.1g/meal, database: 15.78 ± 3.5 g/meal) were significantly below the maximum GNBS of 20.6g/meal. Carbohydrate content (chemical: 52.66 ± 12.22 g/meal, database: 53.67 ± 7.49g/meal) was significantly below the minimum GNBS of 70.60 g/meal, however protein content exceeded the minimum GNBS of 7.5g/meal (chemical: 13.21 ± 2.9 g/meal, database:16.30 ± 3g/meal). Sodium content also exceeded the maximum GNBS of 499mg/meal (chemical: 500 ± 179 mg/meal, database: 516 ± 160mg/meal). Calcium content (chemical: 210 ± 81 mg/meal) met the GNBS, whereas (database: 171 ± 46 mg/meal) did not meet the GNBS, however both values derived were not significantly different from the GNBS 193mg/meal.\ud Cognitive tests revealed a significant improvement in memory function, after consuming a mid-morning snack (mean score 8.67 ± 1.42) than without a snack (mean score 5.81 ± 2.58) (p< 0.001).\ud Conclusion: The analysis of primary school meals as provided revealed that generally the GNBS were met for protein and total fat, but not for carbohydrate. Total energy was significantly lower than minimum GNBS, however this has been observed by other studies and has been suggested that lower energy content may not be unwelcome. Of greater concern is the high sodium content of the meals. Findings revealed by the cognitive testing, suggest that providing a snack mid-morning can enhance cognitive performance.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 2.11 Cognitive Study......................................................................................47 2.11.1 The Impact of a Mid-Morning Snack on Cognitive Performance..........47 2.11.2 Recruitment for cognitive testing..........................................................47 2.11.3 Test Method for Cognitive Performance...............................................48 2.11.4 Scoring Method.....................................................................................49
    • CHAPTER 3: AN ANALYSIS OF PRIMARY SCHOOL MEALS COMPARED
    • TO GOVERNMENT NUTRIENT BASED STANDARDS: RESULTS..................51 3.1 Overview of this chapter..........................................................................51 3.2 A Comparison of LCCG School meal Analysis and GNBS...................51 3.3 Nutrient differences per daily average meal: Laboratory and Nutrient database analysis of LCCG school meals, Compared with GNBS.........53 3.3.1 Energy Content........................................................................................54 3.3.2 Total Fat Content.....................................................................................55 3.3.3 Carbohydrate Content..............................................................................56 3.3.4 Protein Content........................................................................................57 3.3.5 Sodium Content.......................................................................................58 3.3.6 Calcium Content......................................................................................59 3.3.7 Iron Content.............................................................................................60 School Meal Composition.......................................................................61
    • 3.4.1 Macronutrients as a % of Energy............................................................61
    • 3.4.2 Sodium and Calcium Content mg/kcal....................................................63 3.4.2.1 Sodium..............................................................................................63 3.4.2.2 Calcium.............................................................................................64 Differences between values derived from laboratory and Nutrient database analysis.....................................................................................65 Summary.................................................................................................66
    • CHAPTER 5: THE IMPACT OF A MID-MORNING SNACK ON CHILDREN'S
    • COGNITIVE FUNCTION: RESULTS.......................................................................82 5.1 Overview of Chapter...............................................................................82 5.2 Tests Completed......................................................................................82 5.3 Statistical Analysis..................................................................................84 5.4 Summary.................................................................................................84
    • CHAPTER 6: DISCUSSION.......................................................................................85 6.1 Overview of this chapter.........................................................................85 6.2 Aim 1: Analysis of Primary School Meals, Compared to GNBS...........86 6.2.1 Macronutrients provided per meal..........................................................86 6.2.1.1 Total Fat content...............................................................................86 6.2.1.2 Protein content..................................................................................87 6.2.1.3 Carbohydrate content........................................................................89 6.2.2 Micronutrients provided per meal...........................................................90
    • 6.2.3 Energy content per meal..........................................................................94
    • 6.2.4 School meal composition.........................................................................96 Aim 2: A comparison between 2002 and 2012 LCCG menus................98 Aim 3: The impact of a mid-morning snack on cognition....................101 The limitations and strengths of this study...........................................102
    • CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION AND RECOMENDATIONS.................................107 7.1 Conclusion.............................................................................................107 7.2 Recommendations.................................................................................108 7.3 Future expansion of this study..............................................................109
    • CHAPTER 8: APPENDICES.....................................................................................123 8.1 Aim one - SPSS output..........................................................................123 8.2 Aim two - SPSS output..........................................................................135 8.3 Aim three - SPSS output........................................................................147 8.4 Letter of Consent (Moss Side Primary School).....................................148 8.5 Participant information form.................................................................149 8.6 Participant Consent form.......................................................................152
    • Government Nutrient Based Standards 2007..........................................28
    • Independent T Tests.................................................................................65
    • derived from the WinDiet database analysis of both 2002 & 2012 LCCG
    • GNBS.......................................................................................................71
    • from the WinDiet database analysis of both 2002 & 2012 LCCG primary
    • GNBS.......................................................................................................73
    • from the WinDiet database analysis of both 2002 & 2012 LCCG primary
    • GNBS.......................................................................................................75
    • derived from the WinDiet database analysis of both 2002 & 2012 LCCG
    • GNBS.......................................................................................................77
    • Group Statistics Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean 53.6707 7.48592 1.93286 52.6560 12.21611 3.15419
  • No related research data.
  • Discovered through pilot similarity algorithms. Send us your feedback.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article