Pilot trial of an adult community cooking skills intervention

ISRCTN	ISRCTN91580447
DOI	https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN91580447
Protocol serial number	RES/0150/7794
Sponsor	Newcastle University (UK)
Funder	Policy Research Programme, Department of Health (UK)

Submission date: 21/07/2015
Registration date: 30/07/2015
Last edited: 05/12/2019

Recruitment status: No longer recruiting
Overall study status: Completed
Condition category: Nutritional, Metabolic, Endocrine

Prospectively registered

Protocol

Statistical analysis plan

Results

Individual participant data

Record updated in last year

Plain English summary of protocol

Background and study aims
Dietary improvements may help reduce the prevalence of obesity and certain chronic diseases. Improvements in cooking skills could lead to dietary improvements. Evidence suggests there has been a reduction in cooking skills in the UK population over the past 20 years. The past decade has witnessed an increase in interventions to increase cooking skills aimed at addressing this skills gap. However, a link has yet to be demonstrated between cooking skills and diet. This research has three aims: to analyse existing data to explore associations between cooking skills and diet in the UK population; to conduct analysis of an existing cooking skills intervention; and to conduct a pilot study of a cooking skills intervention. The aim of this study is to find out whether cooking skills interventions are likely to be effective and whether robust evaluation of cooking skills interventions is both practical and feasible.

Who can participate?
Adults aged 18 or over with poor cooking skills.

What does the study involve?
Participants will be randomly allocated to one of two groups. The intervention group will attend an adult cooking skills course comprising eight 60-90 minute weekly sessions at community venues (The Jamie Oliver Ministry of Food (JOMoF) adult cooking skills course).The control group will be offered the cooking skills course after the end of the study.

What are the possible benefits and risks of participating?
The potential benefits of the intervention are that individuals gain confidence and skills in cooking from raw ingredients; and that this, in turn, leads them to eat a healthier diet. Others in a household may also benefit from healthier food preparation, or transfer of skills. There are no major risks to participating. However, working in a kitchen, even supervised, may result in occasional accidental injuries, which can include cuts from kitchen knives, scalding or burns from cooking equipment or hot foods, and inflammation resulting from contact with certain foods (e.g. chillies) if hands are not thoroughly washed before contact with, for example, eyes. These events are very rare and mitigated by appropriate training and safety protocols within the trial.

Where is the study run from?
Institute of Health & Society, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University (UK).

When is the study starting and how long is it expected to run for?
From April 2013 to July 2015.

Who is funding the study?
Policy Research Programme, Department of Health (UK).

Who is the main contact?
Prof Martin White
martin.white@mrc-epid.cam.ac.uk

Contact information

Prof Martin White
Scientific

Centre for Diet & Activity Research (CEDAR)
MRC Epidemiology Unit
School of Clinical Medicine
University of Cambridge
Cambridge
CB2 0QQ
United Kingdom

ORCID ID	0000-0002-1861-6757
Phone	+44 (0)12237 69159
Email	martin.white@mrc-epid.cam.ac.uk

Study information

Primary study design	Interventional
Study design	Single-centre multi-site community-based pilot randomized controlled trial with process and economic evaluations
Secondary study design	Randomised controlled trial
Study type	Participant information sheet
Scientific title	Research to support the evaluation and implementation of adult cooking skills interventions in the UK: pilot randomized controlled trial with process and economic evaluation components
Study objectives	This pilot randomized controlled trial aimed to establish the feasibility of conducting a definitive randomized controlled trial of an adult cooking skills intervention.
Ethics approval(s)	Newcastle University Research Ethics Committee, 22/08/2013, ref: 00659/2013
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied	Prevention of chronic non-communicable diseases associated with unhealthy diet
Intervention	1. Intervention arm - an adult cooking skills course delivered to groups of 6-10 participants, comprising eight 60-90 minute weekly sessions at community venues (The Jamie Oliver Ministry of Food (JOMoF) adult cooking skills course). 2. Control arm - no intervention during the 12-week follow-up period. Control arm participants were offered the cooking skills course after final data collection.
Intervention type	Behavioural
Primary outcome measure(s)	As this was a pilot randomized controlled trial, there was no primary outcome. However, a number of measures were collected to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention and trial procedures. These data were specified by our research questions as follows: 1. What is the theoretical basis, in terms of behaviour change, of the JOMoF cooking skills intervention? 2. What is the fidelity of the JOMoF cooking skills intervention? 3. Are there temporal or locational variations in intervention fidelity? 4. What are the baseline self-reported cooking skills and socio-demographic characteristics of participants of a cooking skills intervention? 5. How do the baseline self-reported cooking skills and socio-demographic characteristics of wait-list recruits compare to community recruits? 6. Do the socio-demographic characteristics of wait-list recruits align with those identified as most in need of cooking skills interventions from research questions 1-4? 7. What are the consequences, both expected and unexpected, of cooking skills interventions for UK adults, as identified by cooking skills intervention participants and providers? 8. How practical and acceptable are cooking skills interventions for UK adult participants as well as those involved in commissioning and delivery? 9. How practical and acceptable are the research methods proposed for a definitive RCT of a multi-site cooking skills intervention, for both UK adult participants as well as those involved in commissioning and delivery? 10. What factors affect non-recruitment, attrition, attendance and compliance with data collection methods? 11. Is economic evaluation of a cooking skills intervention feasible?
Key secondary outcome measure(s)	See above under primary outcomes. As this was a pilot randomized controlled trial there were no primary or secondary outcomes.
Completion date	24/07/2015

Eligibility

Participant type(s)	Healthy volunteer
Age group	Adult
Lower age limit	18 Years
Sex	All
Target sample size at registration	96
Total final enrolment	80
Key inclusion criteria	1. Adults aged 18 years or over 2. Living in the community 3. Self-perceived poor cooking skills 4. Able to speak fluent English
Key exclusion criteria	1. Aged under 18 years 2. Unable to speak English fluently
Date of first enrolment	13/10/2013
Date of final enrolment	07/07/2014

Locations

Countries of recruitment

United Kingdom
England

Study participating centre

Institute of Health & Society, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University

Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road
Newcastle upon Tyne
NE2 4AX
United Kingdom

Results and Publications

Individual participant data (IPD) Intention to share	Yes
IPD sharing plan summary	Available on request
IPD sharing plan

Study outputs

Output type	Details	Date created	Date added	Peer reviewed?	Patient-facing?
Participant information sheet	Participant information sheet	11/11/2025	11/11/2025	No	Yes

Editorial Notes

05/12/2019: The following changes have been made:
1. A final report link has been added to the publication and dissemination plan..
2. The final enrolment number has been added from the reference.
3. The intention to publish date has been changed from 31/01/2016 to 30/06/2020.
20/12/2017: No publications found, verifying study status with principal investigator.