Skip to main content

Table 2 Effects of the intervention on adherence to the Planetary Health Diet Index and on food-related greenhouse gas emissions from the difference-in-differences analysis among 190 hospital employees

From: Effects of a cafeteria-based sustainable diet intervention on the adherence to the EAT-Lancet planetary health diet and greenhouse gas emissions of consumers: a quasi-experimental study at a large German hospital

Outcomes

Model 1

Model 2

Model 3

Model 4

Planetary Health Diet Index (0–42 score points)

 n

190

190

187

190*

Means at baseline

 Control (a)

24·74

23·81

22·16

24·72

 Intervention (b)

25·10

24·07

22·62

25·11

Means at follow-up

 Control (c)

24·68

23·11

22·80

24·72

 Intervention (d)

25·65

23·94

23·80

25·68

 Difference in intervention e = (d-b)

0·55

-0·13

1·18

0·57

 Difference in control f = (c-a)

-0·06

-0·69

0·64

0·01

 Difference-in-differences

0·62

0·56

0·54

0·56

 95% confidence interval

-0·35, 1·58

-0·41, 1·52

-0·51, 1·59

-0·41, 1·54

p-value

0·21

0·26

0·31

0·25

Greenhouse gas emissions (kg CO2e/day)

 n

180

 

177

180*

Means at baseline

 

-

  

 Control (a)

3·32

-

3·59

3·32

 Intervention (b)

3·29

-

3·60

3·29

Means at follow-up

 

-

  

 Control (c)

3·37

-

3·58

3·37

 Intervention (d)

3·31

-

3·52

3·31

 Difference in intervention e = (d-b)

0·02

-

-0·08

0·01

 Difference in control f = (c-a)

0·05

-

-0·01

0·05

 Difference-in-differences

-0·03

-

-0·07

-0·03

 95% confidence interval

-0·16, 0·10

-

-0·22, 0·08

-0·16, 0·10

p-value

0·64

-

0·34

0·64

  1. Model 1: Unadjusted
  2. Model 2: Adjusted for educational attainment
  3. Model 3: Adjusted for educational attainment, number of children in the household, occupation
  4. Model 4: weighted by propensity score
  5. *Observations with missing covariates were imputed with the mode·