Healthy NutritionIGMNCT06996418
Intergenerational Mealtime at a Shared Site: A Small-scale Trial
A study testing Intergenerational mealtime (intervention + follow-up) and Intergenerational mealtime (wait + intervention) in people with Healthy Nutrition and Intergenerational Relations, run by Universidad de Granada at 1 site in Spain.
Trial summary
The goal of this study is to find out whether having children and older people who attend an intergenerational center eating lunch together on a regular basis may be an improvement over continuing to eat lunch with their generational peers in separate dining rooms at the center. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 2 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Healthy Nutrition, Intergenerational Relations, Well-being
- What is being tested?
- Intergenerational mealtime (intervention + follow-up) and Intergenerational mealtime (wait + intervention)
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 42 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSpain
- Study dates
- 18 Feb 2025to 21 Jul 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 2 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Informed consent signed by each participant or his/her legal representative.
- Eating autonomy: Ability to feed oneself without continuous assistance from another person.
- Expected stay at the Intergenerational Center until July 2025.
- Negative certificate of Sexual Offenses (mandatory in case of contact with minors).
- Screening for nutritional risk, dysphagia and oral health: Exclusion of persons with severe untreated malnutrition, severe dysphagia or oral problems preventing chewing.
- Adequate cognitive status: mild or moderate cognitive impairment (rating ≤5 on the Global Deterioration Scale - GDS).
Show all 10Show fewer
- Informed consent: Signature of the legal guardian authorizing participation in the study.
- Child's assent: Positive expression of willingness to participate.
- Feeding autonomy: Ability to eat without continuous assistance from an adult.
- Expected permanence in the Intergenerational Center until July 2025.
Who cannot join
- Advanced cognitive impairment (GDS > 5) affecting comprehension and social interaction.
- Severe dysphagia or oral health problems preventing normal feeding.
- Unstable medical conditions that limit intergenerational dining attendance.
- History of aggressive behavior or history of refusal to interact with children.
- Lack of consent or refusal to participate in any of the study assessments.
- Need for ongoing feeding assistance.
- Severe medical conditions affecting feeding or social participation (e.g. severe metabolic disease).
- Expectation of transfer or departure from the Intergenerational Center prior to completion of the study.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Spain1 site
Centro Intergeneracional de Referencia de Macrosad
Albolote, Granada, 18220
About this study
Official title: Experimental Evaluation of Intergenerational Mealtime at a Shared Site: A Randomized Wait-listed Controlled Trial
The goal of this study is to find out whether having children and older people who attend an intergenerational center eating lunch together on a regular basis may be an improvement over continuing to eat lunch with their generational peers in separate dining rooms at the center.
Specifically, the study analyzes the functioning and potential impact of an intergenerational dining room in terms of healthy eating, nutrition, self-evaluation of health and well-being, relational care, nutritional knowledge, and intergenerational attitudes. For this purpose, it sets up, in an intergenerational center, a dining room attended by children aged 2-3 years and older people aged 75 years and older who had previously been taking their lunch in separate dining rooms at the center.
Read more
The main questions this study aims to answer are:
- Does eating lunch at the intergenerational dining room improve the intake of healthy foods by children and older people compared to eating at their usual separate dining rooms with their peers?
- Does this type of intergenerational dining room serve as a space for nutritional education of children and older people?
- Does the experience of eating together have a positive influence in terms of children's attitudes towards older people and vice versa?
Read the detailed description
The term Intergenerational Dining Room (IGD) refers to the intentional and planned space that enables people from different generations to periodically share the experience of eating together in settings dedicated to delivering care and development services (e.g. residential centers, schools), community work, intergenerational practices, etc.
The conceptual framework behind IGD has been articulated through combining the following three key components:
- Relationship-Centered Care (RCC): scientific evidence suggests that older people's care should focus on promoting meaningful relationships, rather than approaching them solely from the individualistic perspective of care.
- A life-course perspective on food: the act of feeding is a social practice that cuts across the life course and contributes to the construction of intergenerational relationships. Previous studies have pointed to the importance of mealtime as a space for interaction and learning between generations.
- Commensality, education, and nutritional health in caregiving spaces: research has shown that intergenerational programs have the capacity to improve the nutrition of their participants and encourage healthy eating habits, especially in settings where access to adequate food may be a challenge.
However, despite the growing interest in these components, empirical evidence remains limited, especially for structured intergenerational mealtime interventions with rigorous evaluation of their impact. Hence the goal of this interventional study: to analyze and explain, for the case of a specific institutional context - lunchtime at an intentional shared site's intergenerational dining room - not only the type of food and nutrition patterns but also some of the processes, causal mechanisms, and impacts associated with the social act of eating lunch together as a routine intergenerational practice.
Participant population is integrated by toddlers (ages 2-3) and older people (ages 79 and above) who attend regularly a co-located Preschool and Adult Day Care Center at an intergenerational shared site.
Apart from the 3 main questions presented in the brief summary, the study shall pay attention to further questions as the following:
- Is the intergenerational dining room a space where relational care and social interactions are practiced more than at the usual separate dining rooms?
- Does the subjective perception of health and well-being improve in older people because of their participation in intergenerational meals compared to having lunch at their regular daycare dining room with generational peers?
- Do children show greater well-being and participation at lunchtime when they are at the intergenerational dining room compared to the school dining room?; 4) Overall, is the feeding experience at the intergenerational dining room more positive than at dining rooms where each generational group has lunch with generational peers?
Researchers will compare a group of toddlers and older adults having lunch together several days per week to a similar group eating lunch just with their peers to see if intergenerational mealtimes make any difference. It is expected that the total number of intergenerational meals over the 16 intervention weeks amounts to 60.
Design of this study corresponds to a randomized wait-listed controlled trial including two wait-listed intervention groups (due to limitation of space to accommodate more than 10 people at the intergenerational dining room) and one control group.
Participants in the intervention will:
- Intergenerational Dining Room - Group #1 (IG1): During 8 weeks, have lunch at the intergenerational dining room four times per week and once a week at the regular peer-based dining room. Then, move to the peer-based dining room to have lunch five days per week for another 8 weeks (follow-up period).
- Intergenerational Dining Room - Group #2 (IG2): Have lunch at the peer-based dining room five days per week for some 8 weeks (waiting period), then for the following 8 weeks eat lunch at the intergenerational dining room four times per week and once a week at the regular peer-based dining room.
- Monogenerational Dining Room - Control Group (CG): Have lunch at their regular peer-based dining rooms for 16 weeks.
Both the control and intervention groups will undergo a final follow-up period of around two weeks to determine the duration of the observed impacts.
- Conditions
- Healthy Nutrition, Intergenerational Relations, Well-being, Relational Care, Eating, Mealtimes
- Being tested
- Intergenerational mealtime (intervention + follow-up), Intergenerational mealtime (wait + intervention)
- Keywords
- Healthy Nutrition, Nutritional Knowledge, Intergenerational Mealtime, Intergenerational Shared Sites
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Intergenerational mealtime (intervention + follow-up)Other
Intergenerational lunchtime at an intentional intergenerational dining room 4 days a week for 8 weeks. Once this period is over, this group will move on to a follow-up phase that will last for another 8 weeks, during which they will eat 5 days a week in different dining rooms with their generational peers, as they had been doing up to the time of the intervention. Finally, they will undergo a last follow-up period of about 2 weeks.
Intergenerational mealtime (wait + intervention)Other
Waiting period consisting of 8 weeks (while Intervention Group #1 is using the intergenerational dining room). During this period toddlers and older people will eat lunch 5 days a week with their generational peers in separate dining rooms as they have been doing before the intervention. They will then move to eating together lunch 4 days a week for 8 weeks in the intergenerational dining room. Once this period is over they will enter a final follow-up phase for about 2 weeks during which they will go back to eat in generationally separate dining rooms.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Intergenerational Dining Room (Group #1) | Experimental | This is a group composed of 5 older people and 5 toddlers, all of them regular attendees at an intergenerational shared site. Receives: Other: Intergenerational mealtime (intervention + follow-up) |
| Intergenerational Dining Room (Group #2) | Experimental | This is a group consisting of 5 other older people and 5 toddlers (other than those in Intervention Group #1) from the same intergenerational shared site. Receives: Other: Intergenerational mealtime (wait + intervention) |
| Monogenerational Dining Room (Control Group) | No intervention | This group is made up of 11 elderly people and 12 children from the same intergenerational shared site as the two intervention groups. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Intake of healthy foods by children and older people
Application of the Comstock method for the assessment of leftovers through photographing each dish after ingestion and calculating the proportion of waste (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, \& 100%).
Measured: Day-by-day change in leftovers from baseline to final follow-up (18 weeks)
Nutritional education
Ad hoc test for assessing nutritional knowledge (identification and classification of foods, and discrimination between frequently and sporadically consumed foods) using the Nutriplato®. A set of five nutritional education activities is used to test nutritional knowledge among older adults (as toddlers' tutors) and toddlers. The number of successes and failures in each activity is assessed at different times throughout the intervention period.
Measured: Baseline, 8 weeks, 16 weeks and 18 weeks
Toddlers' attitudes towards older people
A Visual Analog Scale (Young Children's Views of Older People) with original illustrations depicting images of older people according to a set of 11 bipolar pairs of adjectives (e.g., slow-fast, dull-exciting) will be presented to toddlers for them to locate their current attitudes towards older people. For each pair of adjectives ranging from -25 (extremely negative) to +25 (extremely positive) a mean global score will be calculated. Higher scores will indicate more positive attitudes towards older people.
Measured: Baseline, 8 weeks, 16 weeks and 18 weeks
Older people's attitudes towards toddlers
Semantic differential with 9 pairs of bipolar adjectives with Likert-type responses (4 options). For each pair of adjectives ranging from -4 (extremely negative) to +4 (extremely positive) a mean global score will be calculated. Higher scores will indicate more positive attitudes towards toddlers.
Measured: Baseline, 8 weeks, 16 weeks and 18 weeks
Older people's attitudes about intergenerational exchanges
Intergenerational Exchanges Attitude Scale , including 13 statements in two subscales ("Attributes to children" and "Relationships between older adults and children" subscales), each rated by older people along a 4-point Likert scale. This format allocates points from 4 (completely agree) to 1 (completely disagree). Higher scores indicate a more positive attitude in relation to intergenerational exchanges.
Measured: Baseline, 8 weeks, 16 weeks and 18 weeks
Secondary outcomes (8)
Reaction to food items
Due to the young age of toddlers participating in the study, and based on a validated protocol, a member of the team will record observations and feedback on toddlers' reactions, facial expressions, and comments about foods at the moment of consumption. This additional measure will help to better contextualize and interpret results from the Comstock method (see primary outcome measure 'Intake of healthy foods by children and older people').
Measured: Daily from week 4 to week 16
Relationship-centered environment
Three components [Social Interactions, Mealtime Relational-Care Checklist, and Mealtime Clean-up] from the Mealtime Scan+ instrument, a reliable tool, will lead to assess both the social environment of the dining room and how relationship-centred were meals being observed. An overall quality of dining environment rating on a 1-8 scale will be calculated too.
Measured: 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks and 16 weeks
Subjective well-being (older people)
The WHO-5 Well-being Inde is a self-report instrument measuring mental well-being. It consists of 5 statements rated on a 4-point scale. The higher the score, the greater the well-being. A score below 8 indicates low well-being.
Measured: 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks and 16 weeks
Toddlers' prosocial behavior
Prosocial Behavior subscale from the "Measure of Early Childhood Empathy" completed by toddlers' parents and teacher. It consists of 9 statements rated on a 4-point scale. The higher the score, the greater the prosocial behavior.
Measured: Baseline, 8 weeks and 16 weeks
Place-based eating experience (older adults)
Ad hoc semi-structured qualitative interviews to older adults covering themes such as relationality, care and feeding experience; attention and knowledge about feeding; physical and emotional well-being; generational intelligence and views on toddlers.
Measured: 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks, & 16 weeks
Self-esteem (older people)
Adapted and validated version of the Rosenberg's Self-Esteem Scale for older people. It consists of 5 statements in which older people self-rate along a 4-point Likert scale. Higher scores indicate higher self-esteem.
Measured: 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks, 16 weeks
Subjective health (older people)
EQ-5D's visual analogue scale records the respondent's self-rated health on a vertical 0-100 scale whose endpoints are 'Best imaginable health state' and 'Worst imaginable health state'.
Measured: 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks, 16 weeks
Place-based eating experience (toddlers)
Ad hoc dialogue-based qualitative interviews to toddlers in the intervention groups exploring feeding experience, physical and emotional well-being and views on older people.
Measured: 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks, & 16 weeks
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted30 May 2025
- Study start18 Feb 2025
- Primary completion7 Jul 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion21 Jul 2025 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Healthy NutritionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 42 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Universidad de Granada
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Nestlé Nutrition Spain, Macrosad
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Mariano Sánchez, Universidad de Granada
- Investigators
- Mariano Sánchez, Doc.Soc., Principal investigator, Universidad de Granada
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06996418
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 30C0647400
- Acronym
- IGM
- Status last verified
- May 2025
- First submitted
- 9 May 2025
- Last updated
- 31 May 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided: A decision on IPD sharing will be made at a later date. It is a matter still to be discussed by the project stakeholders.
Publications
Lopez-Lopez R, Artacho R, Rodriguez-Perez C, Justicia-Garcia J, Carrillo A, Sanchez M. Intergenerational Mealtimes in Adult Day Care Settings: Impact of a Pilot Randomised Control Study on the Well-Being, Health, and Food Intake of Older Adults. Healthcare (Basel). 2026 Mar 3;14(5):635. doi: 10.3390/healthcare14050635.
PubMed 41827589
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 31 May 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Experimental Evaluation of Intergenerational Mealtime at a Shared Site: A Randomized Wait-listed Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06996418
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- IGM / 30C0647400
- Conditions
- Healthy Nutrition, Intergenerational Relations, Well-being, Relational Care, Eating, Mealtimes
- Keywords
- Healthy Nutrition, Nutritional Knowledge, Intergenerational Mealtime, Intergenerational Shared Sites
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Active, not recruiting
- Enrolment
- 42 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Universidad de GranadaUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Nestlé Nutrition Spain, Macrosad
- Study start
- 18 Feb 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 7 Jul 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 21 Jul 2025 (estimated)
- First posted
- 30 May 2025 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The goal of this study is to find out whether having children and older people who attend an intergenerational center eating lunch together on a regular basis may be an improvement over continuing to eat lunch with their generational peers in separate dining rooms at the center.
Specifically, the study analyzes the functioning and potential impact of an intergenerational dining room in terms of healthy eating, nutrition, self-evaluation of health and well-being, relational care, nutritional knowledge, and intergenerational attitudes. For this purpose, it sets up, in an intergenerational center, a dining room attended by children aged 2-3 years and older people aged 75 years and older who had previously been taking their lunch in separate dining rooms at the center.
The main questions this study aims to answer are:
- Does eating lunch at the intergenerational dining room improve the intake of healthy foods by children and older people compared to eating at their usual separate dining rooms with their peers?
- Does this type of intergenerational dining room serve as a space for nutritional education of children and older people?
- Does the experience of eating together have a positive influence in terms of children's attitudes towards older people and vice versa?
Detailed description
The term Intergenerational Dining Room (IGD) refers to the intentional and planned space that enables people from different generations to periodically share the experience of eating together in settings dedicated to delivering care and development services (e.g. residential centers, schools), community work, intergenerational practices, etc.
The conceptual framework behind IGD has been articulated through combining the following three key components:
- Relationship-Centered Care (RCC): scientific evidence suggests that older people's care should focus on promoting meaningful relationships, rather than approaching them solely from the individualistic perspective of care.
- A life-course perspective on food: the act of feeding is a social practice that cuts across the life course and contributes to the construction of intergenerational relationships. Previous studies have pointed to the importance of mealtime as a space for interaction and learning between generations.
- Commensality, education, and nutritional health in caregiving spaces: research has shown that intergenerational programs have the capacity to improve the nutrition of their participants and encourage healthy eating habits, especially in settings where access to adequate food may be a challenge.
However, despite the growing interest in these components, empirical evidence remains limited, especially for structured intergenerational mealtime interventions with rigorous evaluation of their impact. Hence the goal of this interventional study: to analyze and explain, for the case of a specific institutional context - lunchtime at an intentional shared site's intergenerational dining room - not only the type of food and nutrition patterns but also some of the processes, causal mechanisms, and impacts associated with the social act of eating lunch together as a routine intergenerational practice.
Participant population is integrated by toddlers (ages 2-3) and older people (ages 79 and above) who attend regularly a co-located Preschool and Adult Day Care Center at an intergenerational shared site.
Apart from the 3 main questions presented in the brief summary, the study shall pay attention to further questions as the following:
- Is the intergenerational dining room a space where relational care and social interactions are practiced more than at the usual separate dining rooms?
- Does the subjective perception of health and well-being improve in older people because of their participation in intergenerational meals compared to having lunch at their regular daycare dining room with generational peers?
- Do children show greater well-being and participation at lunchtime when they are at the intergenerational dining room compared to the school dining room?; 4) Overall, is the feeding experience at the intergenerational dining room more positive than at dining rooms where each generational group has lunch with generational peers?
Researchers will compare a group of toddlers and older adults having lunch together several days per week to a similar group eating lunch just with their peers to see if intergenerational mealtimes make any difference. It is expected that the total number of intergenerational meals over the 16 intervention weeks amounts to 60.
Design of this study corresponds to a randomized wait-listed controlled trial including two wait-listed intervention groups (due to limitation of space to accommodate more than 10 people at the intergenerational dining room) and one control group.
Participants in the intervention will:
- Intergenerational Dining Room - Group #1 (IG1): During 8 weeks, have lunch at the intergenerational dining room four times per week and once a week at the regular peer-based dining room. Then, move to the peer-based dining room to have lunch five days per week for another 8 weeks (follow-up period).
- Intergenerational Dining Room - Group #2 (IG2): Have lunch at the peer-based dining room five days per week for some 8 weeks (waiting period), then for the following 8 weeks eat lunch at the intergenerational dining room four times per week and once a week at the regular peer-based dining room.
- Monogenerational Dining Room - Control Group (CG): Have lunch at their regular peer-based dining rooms for 16 weeks.
Both the control and intervention groups will undergo a final follow-up period of around two weeks to determine the duration of the observed impacts.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Intergenerational Dining Room (Group #1) | Experimental | Other: Intergenerational mealtime (intervention + follow-up)This is a group composed of 5 older people and 5 toddlers, all of them regular attendees at an intergenerational shared site. |
| Intergenerational Dining Room (Group #2) | Experimental | Other: Intergenerational mealtime (wait + intervention)This is a group consisting of 5 other older people and 5 toddlers (other than those in Intervention Group #1) from the same intergenerational shared site. |
| Monogenerational Dining Room (Control Group) | No intervention | –This group is made up of 11 elderly people and 12 children from the same intergenerational shared site as the two intervention groups. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 2 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (10 listed)
- Informed consent signed by each participant or his/her legal representative.
- Eating autonomy: Ability to feed oneself without continuous assistance from another person.
- Expected stay at the Intergenerational Center until July 2025.
- Negative certificate of Sexual Offenses (mandatory in case of contact with minors).
- Screening for nutritional risk, dysphagia and oral health: Exclusion of persons with severe untreated malnutrition, severe dysphagia or oral problems preventing chewing.
Key exclusion criteria (8 listed)
- Advanced cognitive impairment (GDS > 5) affecting comprehension and social interaction.
- Severe dysphagia or oral health problems preventing normal feeding.
- Unstable medical conditions that limit intergenerational dining attendance.
- History of aggressive behavior or history of refusal to interact with children.
- Lack of consent or refusal to participate in any of the study assessments.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Intergenerational mealtime (intervention + follow-up)Intergenerational lunchtime at an intentional intergenerational dining room 4 days a week for 8 weeks. Once this period is over, this group will move on to a follow-up phase that will last for another 8 weeks, during which they will eat 5 days a week in different dining rooms with their generational peers, as they had been doing up to the time of the intervention. Finally, they will undergo a last follow-up period of about 2 weeks. | Other | Intergenerational Dining Room (Group #1) |
| Intergenerational mealtime (wait + intervention)Waiting period consisting of 8 weeks (while Intervention Group #1 is using the intergenerational dining room). During this period toddlers and older people will eat lunch 5 days a week with their generational peers in separate dining rooms as they have been doing before the intervention. They will then move to eating together lunch 4 days a week for 8 weeks in the intergenerational dining room. Once this period is over they will enter a final follow-up phase for about 2 weeks during which they will go back to eat in generationally separate dining rooms. | Other | Intergenerational Dining Room (Group #2) |
Primary outcome
Intake of healthy foods by children and older people
Time frame: Day-by-day change in leftovers from baseline to final follow-up (18 weeks)
Application of the Comstock method for the assessment of leftovers through photographing each dish after ingestion and calculating the proportion of waste (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, \& 100%).
Nutritional education
Time frame: Baseline, 8 weeks, 16 weeks and 18 weeks
Ad hoc test for assessing nutritional knowledge (identification and classification of foods, and discrimination between frequently and sporadically consumed foods) using the Nutriplato®. A set of five nutritional education activities is used to test nutritional knowledge among older adults (as toddlers' tutors) and toddlers. The number of successes and failures in each activity is assessed at different times throughout the intervention period.
Toddlers' attitudes towards older people
Time frame: Baseline, 8 weeks, 16 weeks and 18 weeks
A Visual Analog Scale (Young Children's Views of Older People) with original illustrations depicting images of older people according to a set of 11 bipolar pairs of adjectives (e.g., slow-fast, dull-exciting) will be presented to toddlers for them to locate their current attitudes towards older people. For each pair of adjectives ranging from -25 (extremely negative) to +25 (extremely positive) a mean global score will be calculated. Higher scores will indicate more positive attitudes towards older people.
Older people's attitudes towards toddlers
Time frame: Baseline, 8 weeks, 16 weeks and 18 weeks
Semantic differential with 9 pairs of bipolar adjectives with Likert-type responses (4 options). For each pair of adjectives ranging from -4 (extremely negative) to +4 (extremely positive) a mean global score will be calculated. Higher scores will indicate more positive attitudes towards toddlers.
Older people's attitudes about intergenerational exchanges
Time frame: Baseline, 8 weeks, 16 weeks and 18 weeks
Intergenerational Exchanges Attitude Scale , including 13 statements in two subscales ("Attributes to children" and "Relationships between older adults and children" subscales), each rated by older people along a 4-point Likert scale. This format allocates points from 4 (completely agree) to 1 (completely disagree). Higher scores indicate a more positive attitude in relation to intergenerational exchanges.
8 secondary outcomes
Reaction to food items
Time frame: Daily from week 4 to week 16
Relationship-centered environment
Time frame: 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks and 16 weeks
Subjective well-being (older people)
Time frame: 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks and 16 weeks
Toddlers' prosocial behavior
Time frame: Baseline, 8 weeks and 16 weeks
Place-based eating experience (older adults)
Time frame: 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks, & 16 weeks
Self-esteem (older people)
Time frame: 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks, 16 weeks
Subjective health (older people)
Time frame: 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks, 16 weeks
Place-based eating experience (toddlers)
Time frame: 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks, & 16 weeks
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 31 May 2025.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 41827589Lopez-Lopez R, Artacho R, Rodriguez-Perez C, Justicia-Garcia J, Carrillo A, Sanchez M. Intergenerational Mealtimes in Adult Day Care Settings: Impact of a Pilot Randomised Control Study on the Well-Being, Health, and Food Intake of Older Adults. Healthcare (Basel). 2026 Mar 3;14(5):635. doi: 10.3390/healthcare14050635.
- Public presentation of the pilot's launching (Spanish)Link provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided. A decision on IPD sharing will be made at a later date. It is a matter still to be discussed by the project stakeholders.
Related trials for Healthy Nutrition
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Assessing the Impact of Perceptions of Unpredictability on Objective Measures of Food Consumption and Metabolism
Healthy Volunteer, Obestity
Not yet recruiting
Nutrition Intervention for Older Adults and Research Training
Impaired Mobility
Active, not recruiting
Growing Healthy Children and Families in Rural Arkansas
Pediatric Obesity, Health Behavior, Risky
Recruiting
Sex Differences in Metabolism Following a High-fat Meal
Healthy Nutrition
Active, not recruiting
Motivational Interviewing Intervention for Families With Overweight and Obesity
Obesity & Overweight
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Mariano Sánchez, Doc.Soc. principal investigator
Universidad de Granada
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Intergenerational mealtime (intervention + follow-up) and Intergenerational mealtime (wait + intervention) in people with Healthy Nutrition and Intergenerational Relations, run by Universidad de Granada at 1 site in Spain.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 10 inclusion and 8 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: under way, not looking for participants, as of the sponsor's last update on 31 May 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Spain. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Intake of healthy foods by children and older people (time frame: Day-by-day change in leftovers from baseline to final follow-up (18 weeks)). The study lists 5 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06996418, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 31 May 2025.