National survey on the use of mobile food delivery services during school hours in the United States

National survey on the use of mobile food delivery services during school hours in the United States | medRxiv /* */ /* */ <!-- <!-- /*! * yepnope1.5.4 * (c) WTFPL, GPLv2 */ (function(a,b,c){function d(a){return"[object Function]"==o.call(a)}function e(a){return"string"==typeof a}function f(){}function g(a){return!a||"loaded"==a||"complete"==a||"uninitialized"==a}function h(){var a=p.shift();q=1,a?a.t?m(function(){("c"==a.t?B.injectCss:B.injectJs)(a.s,0,a.a,a.x,a.e,1)},0):(a(),h()):q=0}function i(a,c,d,e,f,i,j){function k(b){if(!o&&g(l.readyState)&&(u.r=o=1,!q&&h(),l.onload=l.onreadystatechange=null,b)){"img"!=a&&m(function(){t.removeChild(l)},50);for(var d in y[c])y[c].hasOwnProperty(d)&&y[c][d].onload()}}var j=j||B.errorTimeout,l=b.createElement(a),o=0,r=0,u={t:d,s:c,e:f,a:i,x:j};1===y[c]&&(r=1,y[c]=[]),"object"==a?l.data=c:(l.src=c,l.type=a),l.width=l.height="0",l.onerror=l.onload=l.onreadystatechange=function(){k.call(this,r)},p.splice(e,0,u),"img"!=a&&(r||2===y[c]?(t.insertBefore(l,s?null:n),m(k,j)):y[c].push(l))}function j(a,b,c,d,f){return q=0,b=b||"j",e(a)?i("c"==b?v:u,a,b,this.i++,c,d,f):(p.splice(this.i++,0,a),1==p.length&&h()),this}function k(){var a=B;return a.loader={load:j,i:0},a}var l=b.documentElement,m=a.setTimeout,n=b.getElementsByTagName("script")[0],o={}.toString,p=[],q=0,r="MozAppearance"in l.style,s=r&&!!b.createRange().compareNode,t=s?l:n.parentNode,l=a.opera&&"[object Opera]"==o.call(a.opera),l=!!b.attachEvent&&!l,u=r?"object":l?"script":"img",v=l?"script":u,w=Array.isArray||function(a){return"[object Array]"==o.call(a)},x=[],y={},z={timeout:function(a,b){return b.length&&(a.timeout=b[0]),a}},A,B;B=function(a){function b(a){var a=a.split("!"),b=x.length,c=a.pop(),d=a.length,c={url:c,origUrl:c,prefixes:a},e,f,g;for(f=0;f<d;f++)g=a[f].split("="),(e=z[g.shift()])&&(c=e(c,g));for(f=0;f<b;f++)c=x[f](c);return c}function g(a,e,f,g,h){var i=b(a),j=i.autoCallback;i.url.split(".").pop().split("?").shift(),i.bypass||(e&&(e=d(e)?e:e[a]||e[g]||e[a.split("/").pop().split("?")[0]]),i.instead?i.instead(a,e,f,g,h):(y[i.url]?i.noexec=!0:y[i.url]=1,f.load(i.url,i.forceCSS||!i.forceJS&&"css"==i.url.split(".").pop().split("?").shift()?"c":c,i.noexec,i.attrs,i.timeout),(d(e)||d(j))&&f.load(function(){k(),e&&e(i.origUrl,h,g),j&&j(i.origUrl,h,g),y[i.url]=2})))}function h(a,b){function c(a,c){if(a){if(e(a))c||(j=function(){var a=[].slice.call(arguments);k.apply(this,a),l()}),g(a,j,b,0,h);else if(Object(a)===a)for(n in m=function(){var b=0,c;for(c in a)a.hasOwnProperty(c)&&b++;return b}(),a)a.hasOwnProperty(n)&&(!c&&!--m&&(d(j)?j=function(){var a=[].slice.call(arguments);k.apply(this,a),l()}:j[n]=function(a){return function(){var b=[].slice.call(arguments);a&&a.apply(this,b),l()}}(k[n])),g(a[n],j,b,n,h))}else!c&&l()}var h=!!a.test,i=a.load||a.both,j=a.callback||f,k=j,l=a.complete||f,m,n;c(h?a.yep:a.nope,!!i),i&&c(i)}var i,j,l=this.yepnope.loader;if(e(a))g(a,0,l,0);else if(w(a))for(i=0;i (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];var j=d.createElement(s);var dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.src='//www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;j.type='text/javascript';j.async=true;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-P4HH5NV'); Skip to main content Home About Submit ALERTS / RSS Search for this keyword Advanced Search National survey on the use of mobile food delivery services during school hours in the United States Mika Matsuzaki , Audrey W Ting , Nick Birk , Maria E Acosta , Carla Tarazona-Meza , Brisa N. Sanchez , Emma Sanchez-Vaznaugh , Sabri Bromage doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.11.12.25339631 Mika Matsuzaki 1 Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of International Health 2 Mahidol University, Institute of Nutrition PhD Find this author on Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for this author on this site Audrey W Ting 1 Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of International Health MHS Find this author on Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for this author on this site Nick Birk 3 Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Department of Biostatistics MS Find this author on Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for this author on this site Maria E Acosta 4 San Francisco State University, Department of Public Health MPH Find this author on Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for this author on this site Carla Tarazona-Meza 1 Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of International Health PhD Find this author on Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for this author on this site Brisa N. Sanchez 5 Drexel University Dornsife School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics PhD Find this author on Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for this author on this site Emma Sanchez-Vaznaugh 4 San Francisco State University, Department of Public Health ScD Find this author on Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for this author on this site Sabri Bromage 2 Mahidol University, Institute of Nutrition 6 Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Department of Nutrition ScD Find this author on Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for this author on this site For correspondence: sabri.bro{at}mahidol.ac.th Abstract Full Text Info/History Metrics Data/Code Preview PDF Abstract Background Federal and state school nutrition policies over the past 20 years have improved nutritional quality of school meals, children’s diet quality, and childhood obesity prevalence in the United States. However, increasing use of mobile food delivery apps during school hours may introduce new dietary risks among adolescents. This study aimed to assess the usage patterns and perceptions of mobile food delivery during school hours among adolescents. Methods We administered a national online survey in July-August 2025 using the AmeriSpeak Teen Omnibus platform administered by NORC at the University of Chicago. The respondents were 1,027 adolescents aged 13-17 years. We estimated and statistically compared survey-weighted distributions of self-reported types and frequencies of mobile food app usage characteristics during and after school by age, sex, race/ethnicity, household income levels, and regional strata using Chi-squared tests. We also conducted thematic analyses of responses to an open-ended question asking whether participants supported or opposed usage of mobile food delivery services during school hours. Results Nearly 1 in 4 adolescents used mobile food delivery services during school hours and nearly half used them after school. Large proportions of adolescents (58.8% and 34.1%) used these services to order fast foods and sugar-sweetened beverages, respectively, while grain bowls, fruit, non-deep fried vegetables, and unsweetened beverages were less popular. About 34% of adolescents in the western U.S. attended schools that allowed mobile food delivery during school hours, a substantially higher proportion than other national regions; however, adolescents in the west more frequently avoided using these services due to the perceived high costs. Nearly half of the respondents support the idea of mobile food delivery during school hours, although distraction from their learning environment was a major concern regardless of their support or opposition. Conclusions Mobile food delivery during school hours is a relatively new method of food acquisition for adolescent students. School nutrition policy should consider students’ access to and usage patterns of both physical and digital food environments to help ensure development of lifelong healthy eating habits among adolescents. Introduction Diet and nutrition are key determinants of childhood obesity 1 , 2 . Studies over the past two decades have shown that unhealthy food environments are risk factors for poor dietary behaviors and obesity among youth 3 , 4 . Access to food from outside of schools was historically possible only in schools where students were allowed to leave campus during lunchtime. In recent years, in addition to physical food environment risk factors like the proximity to unhealthy food outlets, digital food environments , such as online food delivery, have shaped youth dietary choices 5 , 6 . Online food delivery enables youth to obtain outside foods in lieu of or in addition to foods served in schools. However, we currently lack a clear understanding of teenagers’ usage patterns and perceptions of online food delivery platforms during school hours. The emergence of digital tools for food acquisition has introduced additional challenges in measuring and enabling healthy food environments 7 . Digital food environments influence dietary behaviors through various platforms for online food shopping, and also food and health information on the web, social media, and online advertisements 5 , 6 . These platforms can influence food choices and dietary patterns in tandem with physical food environments. Although agencies like the World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe have raised concerns regarding the impact of digital food environments, especially for youth, the efforts to assess and develop strategies to promote healthy dietary behaviors with consideration to both physical and digital food environments remain underdeveloped and fragmented 5 . In the United States, local, state, and federal policies have been enacted to improve the food environment inside schools, with evidence showing beneficial effects on students’ diets and nutrition 8 – 12 . However, policy and policy evaluations have ignored the recent surge in the use of food delivery apps among youth. To the extent that schoolchildren order food from outside school to substitute consumption of school meals, the impact of school nutrition policies would be diminished. In the 2025-2026 academic year, 31 states ban or restrict the use of mobile phones at school 13 , 14 . However, the extent to which schools have applied additional rules specifically for mobile food delivery (e.g., explicit bans or exceptions to the rules) remains unclear. Furthermore, even when general use of mobile phones is banned or restricted during instruction periods, phone use during lunchtime may be allowed or mobile food delivery may be facilitated via schoolteachers and other staff, before or after school hours, or otherwise against rules. This study aimed to address these knowledge gaps through a national survey among school-going adolescents. Using the National Opinion Research Center’s AmeriSpeak Teen Panel platform, we conducted an online survey with over one thousand adolescents to assess and analyze 1) patterns of food delivery app usage during and after school and 2) adolescents’ perspectives on whether such apps’ usage should be allowed in schools. Methods Sample We conducted an online survey (July 31-August 13, 2025) among a national sample of 1,027 English-speaking, U.S. adolescents aged 13-17 years old through the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) AmeriSpeak Teen Panel Q3 Teen Omnibus survey platform 15 . AmeriSpeak surveys are designed to be nationally representative of the U.S. household population by random sampling from the NORC National Master Sample and complementary databases. The AmeriSpeak Teen panel, constructed by recruiting teens 13-17 years old from AmeriSpeak households with children aged 13-17 years old, has a recruitment rate of 26.3% and a retention rate of 78.0%. In this study, our survey was released to 1,444 AmeriSpeak Teen panelists and 723 completed the survey. NORC aimed to provide a minimum of 1000 respondents and recruited additional teens from a non-probability-based, opt-in sample (n=304). The two samples were then combined using NORC’s TrueNorth 3.0 calibration tool, a tree-based non-parametric supervised learning algorithm that creates combined sample weights for sample non-coverage and bias correction. A raking process was used to adjust for any survey nonresponse as well as any noncoverage or under- and oversampling in both probability and non-probability samples resulting from the study specific sample design. Raking variables for both the probability and nonprobability samples included age, sex, census region, race/ethnicity, and parent’s highest education. Population control totals for the raking variables were obtained from the February 2024 Current Population Survey. The weighted data reflect the U.S. population of teens aged 13 to 17. The Institutional Review Board of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health determined this study to be exempt from the human subject research regulations. Measures To assess food delivery app usage patterns, the survey included questions regarding: frequency of current use of mobile apps to order food for delivery to school during and after school hours, the length of time since the school has allowed mobile food delivery apps (if any) was enacted (≥5 years or <5 years), types of foods typically ordered on these apps, and perspectives on whether schools should allow/disallow use of these apps. Mobile food app delivery usage frequency was categorized as frequent (at least once a week), infrequent (less than weekly), or never. For the choice “Never”, the respondents also chose one of three reasons: the school does not allow such usage, it is too expensive, or other non-specified reasons. We also asked whether the respondents favored, opposed, or were unsure about whether mobile food delivery should be allowed during school hours. This question was followed by an open-ended question probing the reasons why they chose those responses. NORC AmeriSpeak provided data on participant sociodemographic and economic backgrounds (adolescent-reported age, sex, and race/ethnicity; and parental-reported household geographic location, highest education levels, and household income), types of devices used to answer the survey, and survey weights. NORC AmeriSpeak provided the four household income categories included in the analysis. Analysis Statistical analyses were performed in R v4.5.1. We conducted descriptive analyses of the survey responses, including survey-weighted percentages and unweighted frequencies. Weighted distributions of reported usage of food delivery apps during and after school were stratified by sociodemographic, economic, and geographic characteristics, and statistically compared using Chi-squared tests. Weighted statistics and hypothesis tests were conducted using the “survey” package. A total of 814 adolescents answered the open-ended question on perceptions of school policy allowing food delivery apps. Two authors conducted an inductive thematic analysis of these responses among 10% of responses using Taguette software to develop codes. One author assigned codes to all responses, and the assignments were checked by two other authors. Some responses were assigned to more than 1 code. The initial set of 183 codes was grouped into 29 themes, excluding 10 tags assigned to the responses that were unclear or not applicable (e.g., “homeschooled”). We analyzed the frequencies of the themes from the thematic analyses to assess the most common reasons for supporting or opposing policy restricting the use of mobile apps for ordering food during school hours. Results This national survey of adolescents involved 1027 respondents, 49.1% female, with a mean age of 15.2 ±1.3 years. A majority of respondents (76.7%) used smartphones to complete the survey. A quarter of the adolescents were currently using—either frequently or infrequently—mobile food delivery services during school hours ( Table 1 ). The use of these services was more common after school (49%). Chi-squared tests for differences in usage of mobile food delivery apps during school hours showed differences by race/ethnicity, household income, and region. About one-fifth of Black adolescents frequently used these services during school hours, a substantially higher proportion than other racial/ethnic groups. Twenty-nine percent of the adolescents from the lower income groups for households (≤$30,000 and $30,000 to ≤60,000) used these services during school hours in comparison to 23% of adolescents from higher-income households. This response difference by household income levels was not seen for after-school usage. View this table: View inline View popup Table 1. Frequency distribution of mobile food delivery app usage during and after school by participant and household characteristics The proportion of adolescents whose schools allowed mobile food delivery was highest among those from the West (34%), compared to 22%, 23%, and 24% in the Northeast, Midwest, and South regions, respectively (data not shown). However, while a greater proportion of schools in the West allowed these services during school hours, a smaller proportion of adolescents in the West use those services because of the perceived high costs than the other regions (data not shown). Participants were asked what they ordered in mobile food delivery apps, whether at school or elsewhere. The overall patterns of types of foods ordered online were similar across racial/ethnic groups ( Figure 1 ), with fast food items (burgers, burritos, tacos, or pizza) reported commonly across subgroups and orders for grain bowls, non-fried vegetables, and fruits less frequently reported. For beverages, 34.1% of adolescents ordered sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) in comparison to 5.3% for unsweetened beverages and 16.1% for beverages with artificial sweeteners. The analysis of all answer types—including combinations of these multiple choices—showed fast food or fast food in combination with SSB as the two most common online orders. Download figure Open in new tab Figure 1. Types of items ordered via food delivery apps by the adolescents by race/ethnicity in 2025. Multiple choice selection was allowed in this question. The values are weighted percentages. While nearly half of the respondents responded affirmatively when they were asked whether they should be allowed to use mobile apps for food delivery during school hours, the other half were either unsure or disapproving ( Table 2 ). We did not find differences in response patterns for any of the subgroups. View this table: View inline View popup Table 2. Distribution of responses to the question on whether participants supported the usage of mobile food delivery apps during school hours (n=1018)* The analyses of the open-ended questions asking why or why not the respondents believed those services should be allowed in school showed several common themes ( Figure 2 ). Download figure Open in new tab Figure 2. Themes commonly discussed by the AmeriSpeak respondents regarding whether the use of mobile food delivery should be allowed in schools. The values are the number of mentions among 814 respondents who provided relevant answers to this open-ended question. Some respondents discussed multiple themes or both negative and positive viewpoints in their individual responses. The most common reason for supporting mobile food delivery during school hours was the desire or need for alternative options. This included preferences, desire for more diverse food selection, unmet needs for allergy or dietary restrictions, and religious reasons. The participants also commonly believed that the food at school was low quality, unhealthy, or not nutritious. Several participants reported not eating enough or at all during school hours. Time constraint during lunch hours (e.g., the lines are too long) was also a commonly reported logistical problem. The participants who were supportive of the use of mobile food delivery during school hours perceived these services to be more convenient, easy, and/or fast. Many also stated that students have or should have the right and freedom to order what they like with their own money. A few respondents also stated that this is a learning opportunity for making smart choices with online food delivery. “…with the option of ordering lunches from apps, it will teach soon-to-be adults money management. If it wasn’t allowed, then they wouldn’t have the opportunity to test and develop their money skills. In the ‘real world’, no rules will prevent people from spending their money, so it’s important to give young people ‘trial runs’” (female respondent) On the other hand, many respondents who were conditionally supportive or unsupportive of mobile food delivery in school were concerned that allowing these services would introduce distractions and disruptions to the school environment. The participants were also wary of unfairness, with only those who can afford to purchase food online would do so and highlighted potential concerns about stigma and bullying. Safety concerns were also common, with many respondents discussing random visitors coming to school and potentially causing problems. Even respondents who were conditionally supportive of mobile food delivery at school were conditionally so because of these potential issues: “I think students should be allowed to order food on apps at school, as long as it’s done responsibly. It gives them more choice, can accommodate dietary needs, and is helpful when cafeteria options are limited. That said, schools should set clear rules to avoid distractions or safety issues” (male respondent) Discussion To our knowledge, this is the first study to show the prevalence and perceptions of mobile food delivery in school, based on a national sample in the U.S. We found that 1 in 4 adolescents are using mobile food delivery during school hours, and about half of the adolescents use these services after school. Fast food items and sugar-sweetened beverages were the most popular online orders among these adolescents. Our results suggest that schools in the West may be allowing the use of online food delivery platforms more but adolescents in the West may be using them less frequently because of the perceived high costs. About half of the respondents supported the idea of schools allowing the usage of online food delivery during school hours, although many also noted concerns like distractions to the learning environment and logistic complications. Online food delivery has become exponentially popular globally over the past decade. While a five-country survey reported 15% of the respondents using online food delivery in 2018—11% in the U.S. 16 The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated this trend. Post pandemic, the prevalence of online food delivery usage quadrupled for full-service restaurant online orders in comparison to the pre-pandemic period 17 . Although research on the impact of increased use of online food delivery services on health outcomes is still in its nascent stage, studies have long suggested adverse effects of eating food from outside of home, such as increased energy intake from fat and lower intake of micronutrients 18 . Among children, higher consumption of fast food is associated with intake of greater total calories, total fat, total carbohydrates, added sugar, sugar-sweetened beverages, and less fiber, fruits, and non-starchy vegetables, all of which are risk factors for obesity and nutrition-related chronic diseases 19 . The prior work points to potential negative effects of online food delivery on youth diet and health 20 . Over the past decade, news media outlets have reported on the adolescent use of food delivery apps in schools and schools’ reactions 21 , but no systematic study was done to examine the extent of usage in schools. The current study found that 1 in 4 adolescents are using these services in school. Some adolescents mentioned that their schools have a blanket policy banning or restricting the use of mobile phones during school hours and preventing them from ordering food online, which is consistent with the reports of state-level policies on restrictions on phone use during school hours 13 . There are currently no federal or state-level policies on whether or how online food orders should be regulated in schools. Studies have found a positive impact of the federal and state school nutrition policies on student diet and weight status 8 , 9 , 22 . However, these policies generally only extend to the food environment within schools, but students acquire food during school hours from other sources like food outlets near schools and, more recently, mobile food delivery. Several studies have found evidence of positive associations between physical food environments near schools and body weight or weight status of schoolchildren 23 – 25 . While it is unclear whether and how much food environments may modify the effects of school nutrition policies, one study found that students attending schools with closed campus policies consumed fast food places or restaurants less frequently, offering insights on the potential impact of outside foods delivered via online platforms 26 . Our study found that fast food items were popular online orders among these adolescents and potentially healthier items like fruits and grain bowls were less commonly reported, which may potentially lead to poor diet among adolescents attending schools that allow online food delivery. Implications Given the pervasiveness of online food orders in society, schools and policymakers should discuss how best to protect youth from the harmful effects of digital food environments, both in terms of the short- and long-term impact. A ban on mobile food delivery alone may not teach adolescents how to navigate through digital food environments and make smart choices in the modern physical and digital food environments during and beyond schooling years. Secondary schools offer an excellent venue to provide such education on how to interact with digital food environments, from online food purchases to nutrition information on social media. Health education requirements could be updated to include these competencies within the Education Code, as most states already specify core health concepts that must be taught. Future research can assess the effects of the intertwined physical and digital food environments on youth dietary behaviors in observational and multi-component intervention studies. There is a need for a different conceptual framework to think about digital food environments, as these digital tools may change the concept of proximity (e.g., food delivery from places that are not near schools). Collaborative research partnerships between researchers and online retailers may be able to help develop intervention programs, curriculum, and policies that help adolescents develop skills and knowledge needed for life-long healthy dietary behaviors. Partnerships with online platforms with strategies like discounts and more prominent displays of healthier food items may also help youth make smart food choices online. Strengths and limitations The current survey was the first to use a nationally representative sample to estimate the prevalence of mobile food delivery usage among adolescents in the U.S., with sociodemographic and regional information allowing us to examine responses by subgroup. Our results also included open-ended questions to which adolescents explained why they support or do not support the use of these services at school, providing deeper insights into their perspectives around online food delivery and, more generally, diet during school hours. On the other hand, the prevalence of service usage and school policies was self-reported data. Future national studies with the schools and actual usage data—potentially from the online food delivery companies—can verify the findings from the current study and further examine geographical variabilities. Conclusion Food environments surrounding adolescents have changed dramatically over the past decade. We found that a quarter of the adolescents may be using online food delivery while in school. Adolescents were more prone to ordering fast food and sugar-sweetened beverages, possibly due to their affordable prices, speed, and preferences for the taste. In addition to restrictions or guidance on mobile food delivery in school, schools may need to offer dietary education and incentives for healthier foods, in partnership with the online food delivery companies, to teach students how to make smart food choices online within and outside of school settings. Data Availability All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors Author contributions MM conceptualized the study. MM and AT developed the survey. MM, AT, NB, and CTM conducted the data analyses. MM wrote the first draft of the manuscript. BNS, EMV, and SB reviewed and edited the manuscript. All authors reviewed and approved the manuscript. Acknowledgement The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. REFERENCES 1. ↵ Apovian CM . Obesity: definition, comorbidities, causes, and burden . Am J Manag Care. 2016;22(7 Suppl):s176-185 . 2. ↵ Sahoo K , Sahoo B , Choudhury AK , Sofi NY , Kumar R , Bhadoria AS . Childhood obesity: causes and consequences . J Family Med Prim Care . 2015 ; 4 ( 2 ): 187 – 192 . doi: 10.4103/2249-4863.154628 OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed 3. ↵ Jia P , Xue H , Cheng X , Wang Y. Effects of school neighborhood food environments on childhood obesity at multiple scales: a longitudinal kindergarten cohort study in the USA . BMC Med . 2019 ; 17 ( 1 ): 99 . doi: 10.1186/s12916-019-1329-2 OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed 4. ↵ Penney TL , Almiron-Roig E , Shearer C , McIsaac JL , Kirk SFL . Modifying the food environment for childhood obesity prevention: challenges and opportunities . Proceedings of the Nutrition Society . 2014 ; 73 ( 2 ): 226 – 236 . doi: 10.1017/S0029665113003819 OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed 5. ↵ The World Health Organization Europe . Digital food environments . Published online 2021 . Accessed June 14, 2025 . https://www.who.int/europe/publications/i/item/WHO-EURO-2021-2755-42513-59052 6. ↵ Granheim SI , Løvhaug AL , Terragni L , Torheim LE , Thurston M. Mapping the digital food environment: A systematic scoping review . Obesity Reviews . 2022 ; 23 ( 1 ): e13356 . doi: 10.1111/obr.13356 OpenUrl CrossRef 7. ↵ Scapin T , Romaniuk H , Feeley A , et al. Global food retail environments are increasingly dominated by large chains and linked to the rising prevalence of obesity . Nat Food . 2025 ; 6 ( 3 ): 283 – 295 . doi: 10.1038/s43016-025-01134-x OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed 8. ↵ Chandran A , Burjak M , Petimar J , et al. Changes in Body Mass Index Among School-Aged Youths Following Implementation of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 . JAMA Pediatr . 2023 ; 177 ( 4 ): 401 – 409 . doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2022.5828 OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed 9. ↵ Sanchez-Vaznaugh EV , Matsuzaki M , Braveman P , et al. School nutrition laws in the US: do they influence obesity among youth in a racially/ethnically diverse state? Int J Obes . 2021 ; 45 ( 11 ): 2358 – 2368 . doi: 10.1038/s41366-021-00900-8 OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed 10. Kenney EL , Barrett JL , Bleich SN , Ward ZJ , Cradock AL , Gortmaker SL . Impact Of The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act On Obesity Trends . Health Affairs . 2020 ; 39 ( 7 ): 1122 – 1129 . doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2020.00133 OpenUrl CrossRef 11. Matsuzaki M , Sánchez BN , Rebanal RD , Gittelsohn J , Sanchez-Vaznaughy EV . California and federal school nutrition policies and obesity among children of Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, and Filipino origins: Interrupted time series Analysis . PLoS Med . 2021 ; 18 ( 5 ). doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003596 OpenUrl CrossRef 12. ↵ United States Department of Agriculture . National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program: Nutrition Standards for All Foods Sold in School as Required by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 . Fed Register . 2013 ; 78 ( 125 ): 39068 – 39120 . OpenUrl 13. ↵ U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences . School Pulse Panel - Interactive Results. National Center for Education Statistics . Accessed September 29, 2025 . https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/spp/results.asp 14. ↵ A. B. C. News . Here are the states banning cellphones in schools and what it means for students . ABC News . https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/states-banning-cellphones-schools/story?id=125515186 . Accessed September 29, 2025 . 15. ↵ The National Opinion Research Center . Amerispeak Teen Panel Overview Probability-Based Survey Infrastructure For Polling U.S . Teens . Published online October 18, 2024 . Accessed September 10, 2025 . https://amerispeak.norc.org/content/dam/amerispeak/about-amerispeak/pdf/amerispeak-teen-panel-technical-overview.pdf 16. ↵ Keeble M , Adams J , Sacks G , et al. Use of Online Food Delivery Services to Order Food Prepared Away-From-Home and Associated Sociodemographic Characteristics: A Cross-Sectional, Multi-Country Analysis . International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health . 2020 ; 17 ( 14 ): 5190 . doi: 10.3390/ijerph17145190 OpenUrl CrossRef 17. ↵ Marchesi K , McLaughlin PW ( Patrick W. Food-Away-from-Home Acquisition Trends throughout the COVID-19 Pandemic . USDA Economic Research Service ; 2023 . doi: 10.32747/2023.8023697.ers OpenUrl CrossRef 18. ↵ Lachat C , Nago E , Verstraeten R , Roberfroid D , Van Camp J , Kolsteren P. Eating out of home and its association with dietary intake: a systematic review of the evidence . Obesity Reviews . 2012 ; 13 ( 4 ): 329 – 346 . doi: 10.1111/j.1467-789X.2011.00953.x OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed 19. ↵ Bowman SA , Gortmaker SL , Ebbeling CB , Pereira MA , Ludwig DS . Effects of Fast-Food Consumption on Energy Intake and Diet Quality Among Children in a National Household Survey . Pediatrics . 2004 ; 113 ( 1 ): 112 – 118 . doi: 10.1542/peds.113.1.112 OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed Web of Science 20. ↵ Stephens J , Miller H , Militello L. Food Delivery Apps and the Negative Health Impacts for Americans . Frontiers in Nutrition . 2020 ; 7 : 14 . doi: 10.3389/fnut.2020.00014 OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed 21. ↵ Elaine S. Povich . Students, bored by cafeteria fare, love food delivery services; schools don’t . Washington Post . https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/students-bored-by-cafeteria-fare-love-food-delivery-services-schools-dont/2019/06/07/2568d12c-8617-11e9-98c1-e945ae5db8fb_story.html . mJune 19, 2019 . Accessed September 20, 2021 . 22. ↵ Sanchez-Vaznaugh EV , Sánchez BN , Baek J , Crawford PB . ‘Competitive’ Food And Beverage Policies: Are They Influencing Childhood Overweight Trends? Health Affairs . 2010 ; 29 ( 3 ): 436 – 446 . doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2009.0745 OpenUrl Abstract / FREE Full Text 23. ↵ Williams J , Scarborough P , Matthews A , et al. A systematic review of the influence of the retail food environment around schools on obesity-related outcomes . Obesity Reviews . 2014 ; 15 ( 5 ): 359 – 374 . doi: 10.1111/obr.12142 OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed 24. da Costa Peres CM , Gardone DS , Costa BV de L , Duarte CK , Pessoa MC , Mendes LL . Retail food environment around schools and overweight: a systematic review . Nutr Rev . 2020 ; 78 ( 10 ): 841 – 856 . doi: 10.1093/nutrit/nuz110 OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed 25. ↵ Matsuzaki M , Sánchez BN , Acosta ME , Botkin J , Sanchez-Vaznaugh EV . Food environment near schools and body weight—A systematic review of associations by race/ethnicity, gender, grade, and socio-economic factors . Obesity Reviews . 2020 ; 21 ( 4 ): e12997 . doi: 10.1111/obr.12997 OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed 26. ↵ Patte KA , Cole AG , Qian W , Magier M , Vine M , Leatherdale ST . Original quantitative research - Are closed campus policies associated with adolescent eating behaviours? Health Promot Chronic Dis Prev Can . 2021 ; 41 ( 3 ): 73 – 84 . doi: 10.24095/hpcdp.41.3.02 OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed View the discussion thread. Back to top Previous Next Posted November 15, 2025. Download PDF Data/Code Email Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv. NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article. Your Email * Your Name * Send To * Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas. You are going to email the following National survey on the use of mobile food delivery services during school hours in the United States Message Subject (Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv Message Body (Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website. Your Personal Message CAPTCHA This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions. Share National survey on the use of mobile food delivery services during school hours in the United States Mika Matsuzaki , Audrey W Ting , Nick Birk , Maria E Acosta , Carla Tarazona-Meza , Brisa N. Sanchez , Emma Sanchez-Vaznaugh , Sabri Bromage medRxiv 2025.11.12.25339631; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.11.12.25339631 Share This Article: Copy Citation Tools National survey on the use of mobile food delivery services during school hours in the United States Mika Matsuzaki , Audrey W Ting , Nick Birk , Maria E Acosta , Carla Tarazona-Meza , Brisa N. Sanchez , Emma Sanchez-Vaznaugh , Sabri Bromage medRxiv 2025.11.12.25339631; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.11.12.25339631 Citation Manager Formats BibTeX Bookends EasyBib EndNote (tagged) EndNote 8 (xml) Medlars Mendeley Papers RefWorks Tagged Ref Manager RIS Zotero Tweet Widget Facebook Like Google Plus One Subject Area Nutrition Subject Areas All Articles Addiction Medicine (572) Allergy and Immunology (864) Anesthesia (302) Cardiovascular Medicine (4448) Dentistry and Oral Medicine (444) Dermatology (383) Emergency Medicine (609) Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (1515) Epidemiology (15240) Forensic Medicine (30) Gastroenterology (1130) Genetic and Genomic Medicine (6612) Geriatric Medicine (669) Health Economics (1000) Health Informatics (4550) Health Policy (1371) Health Systems and Quality Improvement (1613) Hematology (543) HIV/AIDS (1267) Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (15926) Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (1105) Medical Education (624) Medical Ethics (147) Nephrology (668) Neurology (6619) Nursing (346) Nutrition (999) Obstetrics and Gynecology (1147) Occupational and Environmental Health (957) Oncology (3341) Ophthalmology (977) Orthopedics (369) Otolaryngology (421) Pain Medicine (436) Palliative Medicine (130) Pathology (665) Pediatrics (1695) Pharmacology and Therapeutics (693) Primary Care Research (714) Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (5459) Public and Global Health (9247) Radiology and Imaging (2205) Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (1371) Respiratory Medicine (1197) Rheumatology (597) Sexual and Reproductive Health (715) Sports Medicine (530) Surgery (714) Toxicology (99) Transplantation (289) Urology (265) (function(){function c(){var b=a.contentDocument||a.contentWindow.document;if(b){var d=b.createElement('script');d.innerHTML="window.__CF$cv$params={r:'a02754ee9c0f41e2',t:'MTc3OTkwOTE1Mw=='};var a=document.createElement('script');a.src='/cdn-cgi/challenge-platform/scripts/jsd/main.js';document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(a);";b.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(d)}}if(document.body){var a=document.createElement('iframe');a.height=1;a.width=1;a.style.position='absolute';a.style.top=0;a.style.left=0;a.style.border='none';a.style.visibility='hidden';document.body.appendChild(a);if('loading'!==document.readyState)c();else if(window.addEventListener)document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded',c);else{var e=document.onreadystatechange||function(){};document.onreadystatechange=function(b){e(b);'loading'!==document.readyState&&(document.onreadystatechange=e,c())}}}})();