Main outcome measures
Statistical analyses performed
- Oliveira V.
- Frazao E.
- Oliveira V.
- Frazao E.
Materials and Methods
- Bowman S.
- Clemens J.
- Friday J.
- Lynch K.
- Moshfegh A.
Main Outcome Measure
|Characteristic||Higher income children (n = 360)||WIC|
a-eligible nonparticipants (n = 224)
WIC = Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children. WIC-eligible nonparticipants were defined as children aged 2 to <5 years of age who were living in households with income <185% of the federal poverty-income ratio (PIR) but not participating in the WIC program at the time of NHANES interview.
|WIC children (n = 463)|
|N||Weighted %||95% CI||N||Weighted %||95% CI||N||Weighted %||95% CI|
|Family Income (PIR)|
- Oliveira V.
- Frazao E.
|Food group category|
Food categories represent higher and lower priority food groups/subgroups as described in Table 1, available at www.jandonline.org, and the 2017 Review of the WIC Food Package.8 Food categories appear in priority order from highest priority (largest percentage of WIC-participating children consuming less than the recommended intake) to lowest priority (smallest percentage of WIC-participating children consuming less than the recommended intake).
|Higher Income Children (n = 360)||WIC-Eligible Nonparticipants (n = 224)||WIC Children (n = 463)||Recommended amount|
Recommendations represent Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2015-20 recommendations based on a 1,300 kcal food pattern, as presented in the 2017 Review of the WIC Food Package, Tables 5 through 10.8 Recommendations made on a per-week basis have been converted to a per-day basis, to promote comparability between recommendations and the results from this study.
|←mean ± standard error→|
|Seafood (oz eq)||0.03 ± 0.07||< 0.01 ± 0.10||0.15 ± 0.06||0.71 oz eq/d|
|Total vegetables, excluding legumes (c eq)||0.52 ± 0.08||0.39 ± 0.13||0.55 ± 0.07||1.5 c eq/d|
|Dark green vegetables (c eq)||0.01 ± 0.05||< 0.01 ± 0.04||0.05 ± 0.03||0.14 c eq/d|
|Whole grains (oz eq)||0.53 ± 0.07||0.45 ± 0.09||0.62 ± 0.06||2.25 oz eq/d|
|Total red and orange vegetables (c eq)||0.23 ± 0.05||0.01 ± 0.06|
|0.18 ± 0.03||0.43 c eq/d|
|Nuts, seeds, soy (c eq)||0.30 ± 0.14||0.16 ± 0.13||0.17 ± 0.08||0.36 oz eq/d|
|Total starchy vegetables (c eq)||0.12 ± 0.05||0.23 ± 0.07||0.19 ± 0.05||0.50 c eq/d|
|Other vegetables (c eq)||0.17 ± 0.03||0.08 ± 0.02||0.13 ± 0.02||0.36 c eq/d|
|Total dairy (c eq)||1.93 ± 0.12||2.1 ± 0.26||1.8 ± 0.10||2.50 c eq/d|
|Total protein foods (oz eq)||1.96 ± 0.16||2.30 ± 0.23||2.13 ± 0.08||3.50 oz eq/d|
|Legumes computed as vegetables (c eq)||0.03 ± 0.02||0.01 ± 0.02||0.07 ± 0.01||0.07 c eq/d|
|Food group category|
|Higher Income Children (n = 360)||WIC-Eligible Nonparticipants (n = 224)||WIC Children (n = 463)|
|←mean % ± standard error|
|Dark green||3.3 ± 3.4||7.7 ± 5.4||6.4 ± 1.9|
|Total red and orange||49.1 ± 3.5||35.8 ± 5.6||34.5 ± 3.2|
|Total starchy||18.2 ± 3.8||37.5 ± 5.5||34.4 ± 3.5|
|Other vegetables||30.5 ± 2.4||18.7 ± 4.2||24.8 ± 1.8|
|Milk||68.1 ± 3.5||70.4 ± 5.2||72.7 ± 2.2|
|Yogurt||8.1 ± 1.6||6.6 ± 2.1||5.1 ± 1.0|
|Cheese||22.5 ± 3.0||21.8 ± 4.9||20.1 ± 1.5|
|Whole grains||13.2 ± 1.5||14.6 ± 1.8||19.1 ± 1.6|
|Refined grains||86.9 ± 1.6||85.4 ± 1.8||81.0 ± 1.6|
|Seafood||1.9 ± 1.3||2.6 ± 2.4||3.5 ± 1.2|
|Nuts, seeds, soy||14.8 ± 2.8||9.8 ± 2.5||8.9 ± 1.5|
|Food group||% of WIC-participating children consuming less than the recommended intake||Potential action|
|Seafood||100||Consider adding canned fish|
|Total vegetables||99||Consider increasing the CVV|
|Dark green vegetables||94||Consider increasing the CVV|
|Whole grains||93||Consider increasing the whole-grain allowance or adding grain options|
|Total red and orange vegetables||90||Consider increasing the CVV|
|Nuts, seeds, soy||77||Consider reducing the amount in the food package because it is more than supplemental|
|Total starchy vegetables||73||Consider increasing the CVV|
|Other vegetables||73||Consider increasing the CVV|
|Total dairy||73||Consider increasing the yogurt substitution; enhance nutrition education or use behavioral approaches to promote intake of milk already provided in the food package|
|Total protein foods||68||Consider adding canned fish|
|Beans and peas computed as vegetables||59||Consider reducing amount in the food package because it is more than supplemental and providing canned option to promote intake of legumes|
- The WIC Program: Background, trends, and economic issues, 2015 edition. Economic Information Bulletin No. EIB-134.
- WIC Food Packages: Maximum monthly allowances.https://www.fns.usda.gov/wic/wic-food-packages-maximum-monthly-allowancesDate accessed: February 2, 2020
- Changes in nutrient and food group intake among WIC children and women, findings from the 2005-2008 and 2011-2014 NHANES.Public Health Nutr. 2019; 22: 3309-3314
- The impact of the 2009 Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children Food Package Revisions on participants: A systematic review.J Acad Nutr Diet. 2015; 115: 1832-1846
- Revised WIC Food Package and Children’s Diet Quality.Pediatrics. 2016; 137e20153557
- WIC food package changes: Trends in childhood obesity prevalence.Pediatrics. 2019; 143e20182841
- Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2015-2020.
- Review of WIC Food Packages. National Academies Press, Washington, DC2017
- US Dept of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Pregnancy and birth to 24 months.
- Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Work under way.
- Diet quality of US infants and toddlers 7-24 months old in the WIC Infant and Toddler Feeding Practices Study-2.J Nutr. 2018; 148: 1786-1793
- Food and beverage intake from 12 to 23 months by WIC status.Pediatrics. 2019; 143e20182274
- Contribution of WIC-eligible foods to the overall diet of 13- and 24-month-old toddlers in the WIC Infant and Toddler Feeding Practices Study-2.J Acad Nutr Diet. 2019; 119: 435-448
- WIC 2016 eligibility and coverage rates.
- Usual nutrient intakes from the diets of US children by WIC participation and income: Findings from the Feeding Infants and Toddlers Study (FITS) 2016.J Nutr. 2018; 148: 1567S-1574S
- Update on NHANES dietary data: Focus on collection, release, analytical considerations, and uses to inform public policy.Adv Nutr. 2016; 15;7: 121-134
- The US Department of Agriculture Automated Multiple-Pass Method reduces bias in the collection of energy intakes.Am J Clin Nutr. 2008; 88: 324-332
- Food Patterns Equivalent Database. Dabases and SAS data sets.https://www.ars.usda.gov/northeast-area/beltsville-md-bhnrc/beltsville-human-nutrition-research-center/food-surveys-research-group/docs/fped-databases/Date accessed: May 5, 2020
- Food Patterns Equivalents Database 2013-14: Methodology and user guide.
- NHANES 2011-2012 overview.https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/ContinuousNhanes/overview.aspx?BeginYear=2011Date accessed: September 6, 2019
- Mean proportion and population proportion: Two answers to the same question?.J Am Diet Assoc. 1989; 89: 671-676
- National Center for Health Statistics data presentation standards for proportions.. 2017; 175: 1-22
SAS [computer program]. Version 9.4. SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC; 2017.
- Food, Health and Income: Report on a Survey of Adequacy of Diet in Relation to Income.MacMillan, London, United Kingdom1936
- Diet quality of Americans differs by age, sex, race/ethnicity, income, and education level.J Acad Nutr Diet. 2013; 113: 297-306
- Longer Participation in WIC Is Associated with Better Diet Quality in 24-Month-Old Children.J Acad Nutr Diet. 2020; 18: 33-41
- Incentivizing fruit and vegetable purchases among participants in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children.Public Health Nutr. 2015; 18: 33-41
- Women, Infants, and Children Cash Value Voucher (CVV) use in Arizona: A qualitative exploration of barriers and strategies related to fruit and vegetable purchases.J Nutr Educ Behav. 2014; 46: S53-S58
- Federal food package revisions: Effects on purchases of whole-grain products.Am J Prev Med. 2013; 45: 422-429
- Addressing current criticism regarding the value of self-report dietary data.J Nutr. 2015; 145: 2639-2645
STATEMENT OF POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
FUNDING/SUPPORT There is no funding to disclose.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS M. C. Zimmer contributed to study design, analyzed the data, and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. J. A. Venarelli conceptualized the study, and reviewed and commented on subsequent drafts of the manuscript. Both authors approved the final version of the manuscript.