Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-6mz5d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-22T06:05:51.703Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The nutritional quality of the meals and foods provided to beneficiaries of the Brazilian Worker’s Food Program: a systematic review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 April 2025

Fernanda Martins de Albuquerque
Affiliation:
Instituto de Nutrição, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro/UERJ, Rua Francisco Xavier, 524, Maracanã, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Nathália César Nunes
Affiliation:
Instituto de Nutrição, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro/UERJ, Rua Francisco Xavier, 524, Maracanã, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Vanessa Manfre Garcia de Souza
Affiliation:
Instituto de Nutrição, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro/UERJ, Rua Francisco Xavier, 524, Maracanã, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Cintia Chaves Curioni
Affiliation:
Instituto de Nutrição, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro/UERJ, Rua Francisco Xavier, 524, Maracanã, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Daniel Henrique Bandoni
Affiliation:
Instituto de Saúde e Sociedade, Universidade Federal de São Paulo/UNIFESP, Rua Silva Jardim, 136, Vila Matias, Santos, SP, Brazil
Daniela Silva Canella*
Affiliation:
Instituto de Nutrição, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro/UERJ, Rua Francisco Xavier, 524, Maracanã, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
*
Corresponding author: Daniela Silva Canella; Email: daniela.canella@uerj.br

Abstract

The Brazilian Worker’s Food Program (WFP) is a public policy initiative that focuses on nutritional assistance for low-income formal workers (less than five minimum wages). Currently, it serves more than 25 million formal workers (around 54%). This systematic review aimed to assess the nutritional quality of meals offered and/or consumed by beneficiaries of the WFP. Observational studies conducted with workers from companies registered in the programme were eligible, with no restrictions on the period of publication. The nutritional quality was assessed according to the guidelines of the programme (Normative Ordinance No. 66/2006). Twenty cross-sectional studies and one cohort study met the inclusion criteria. Most of the participants were male, from manufacturing industries, and their average age was 35.0 years. The results of the analysis showed that fibre, sodium, calories, and proteins were the nutrients that most exceeded the recommended amounts, whereas carbohydrate was the nutrient that had the least amount. The results showed that the nutritional quality of the food offered to or consumed by workers did not fully meet the required guidelines and, in some companies, did not promote an adequate and healthy diet. The WFP has great potential and needs to be reformulated to make it a programme that contributes to strengthening the realisation of the human right to adequate food.

Information

Type
Review
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Nutrition Society
Figure 0

Table 1. Definition of Population, Exposure, Comparators, Outcomes, and Study Designs (PECOS) for the systematic review, 2025

Figure 1

Fig. 1. PRISMA flow diagram for identification and selection of studies eligible for the systematic review, 2025.

Figure 2

Table 2. Characteristics of the studies included in the systematic review, 2025

Figure 3

Table 3. Compliance with the nutritional guidelines according to Normative Ordinance No. 6/2006, 2025

Figure 4

Table 4. Results of comparisons between workers who are beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries of the Worker’s Food Program, 2025

Figure 5

Table 5. Quality of cross-sectional studies according to the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist, 2025

Figure 6

Table 6. Quality of cohort studies according to the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist, 2025

Supplementary material: File

Albuquerque et al. supplementary material

Albuquerque et al. supplementary material
Download Albuquerque et al. supplementary material(File)
File 311.4 KB