Rationales for Public Support of Prison Nutrition Standards

Overseen By Carolyn Chelius, MS

Age: 18+

Sex: Any

Trial Phase: Academic

Sponsor: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Disqualifiers: Under 18, Residing outside US

No Placebo Group All trial participants will receive the active study treatment (no placebo)

Compensation: Varies

Number of Visits: 1

1000 Participants Needed

Trial Summary

Will I have to stop taking my current medications?

The trial information does not specify whether you need to stop taking your current medications.

What data supports the effectiveness of the treatment Public Support for Prison Nutrition Standards?

Research shows that improving nutrition in prisons can lead to better health outcomes for inmates, such as improved general health and nutrition practices. For example, a study found that participants in a nutrition workshop were more likely to report better nutrition and health compared to those who did not participate. Additionally, providing healthier food options in prisons can help reduce chronic diseases and improve overall health. ^{1 2 3 4 5}

How does the treatment for prison nutrition standards differ from other treatments?

This treatment is unique because it focuses on setting nutrition standards specifically for prisons, which is an underserved area. Unlike typical nutrition treatments that target individual health conditions, this approach aims to improve the overall well-being of incarcerated populations by addressing the symbolic and practical role of food in the prison environment. ^{6 7 8 9 10}

What is the purpose of this trial?

The goal of this experiment is to examine the impact of policy rationale on public support for prison nutrition standards. The main question this experiment aims to answer is: Does the rationale provided for a policy to improve prison nutrition standards impact public support for such a policy? Additionally, this experiment aims to answer: To what extent are participant demographic characteristics correlated with public support for prison nutrition standards?

Research Team

Carolyn Chelius, MS

Principal Investigator

University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Eligibility Criteria

This trial is for healthy individuals interested in participating in a study about public opinion on prison nutrition standards. There are no specific inclusion or exclusion criteria provided, suggesting that the study may be open to a broad adult population.

Inclusion Criteria

Report residing in the US

Have internet access to complete the online survey

Exclusion Criteria

Residing outside the US

I am under 18 years old.

Timeline

Screening

Participants are screened for eligibility to participate in the trial

1 week

Survey

Participants complete an online survey where they are exposed to different policy rationales and asked about their support for prison nutrition standards

15 minutes

1 visit (online)

Follow-up

Participants are monitored for any additional feedback or responses after completing the survey

1 week

Treatment Details

Interventions

• Public Support for Prison Nutrition Standards

Trial Overview The trial is testing how different reasons given for improving prison nutrition (public safety, right-to-health, cost-saving) affect public support compared to not giving any reason at all. It also looks into how participant demographics might influence their opinions.

Participant Groups

Group I: Right-to-health rationale Experimental Treatment 1 Intervention

Group II: Public safety rationale Experimental Treatment 1 Intervention

Group III: No rationale (Control) Experimental Treatment 1 Intervention

Group IV: Cost-saving rationale Experimental Treatment 1 Intervention

Who Is Running the Clinical Trial?

University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Lead Sponsor

Trials

1,588

Recruited

4,364,000+

Stanford University

Collaborator

Trials

2,527

Recruited

17,430,000+

References

1. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Effectiveness of a voluntary nutrition education workshop in a state prison. [2015]

2. England pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Preventing malnutrition in prison. [2016]

3. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

What are we feeding our inmates? [2012]

4. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Developing an Evidence-Based Nutrition Curriculum for Correctional Settings. [2022]

5. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Improving the Food Environment in Washington State-Run Correctional Facilities: The Healthy Commissary Project. [2021]

6. England pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Food and the prison environment: a meta-ethnography of global first-hand experiences of food, meals and eating in custody. [2023]

7. Netherlands pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Is compassion the flip side of punitiveness? Incorporating COVID-19 crisis in experimental vignettes to examine support for visitation and vaccination in prison. [2022]

8. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Standards for Nutrition Support: Adult Hospitalized Patients. [2019]

9. England pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Introduction: Prison foodways. International and multidisciplinary perspectives. [2021]

10. Switzerland pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

A cautionary tale for health education initiatives in vulnerable populations: Improving nutrition in Haiti prisons. [2023]