Advancing Food Is Medicine Research: An EPIS-Informed Qualitative Study of Stakeholder Views

Top Things to Know

FIM programs may be more effective and scalable when CBOs and food providers are engaged as equal partners during study design, budgeting, and evaluation.

Stakeholders identified household benefits, social connection, cultural relevance, community economic impacts, and participant experience as important outcomes that are often overlooked.

The study suggests that FIM research should move toward larger, coordinated studies that incorporate implementation, feasibility, and real-world operational outcomes alongside effectiveness measures to better inform reimbursement and policy decisions.

Summary of Conclusion/Findings

This qualitative study examined stakeholder perspectives from the American Heart Association’s Health Care by Food™ (HCXF) initiative to identify factors influencing the implementation and future research of Food Is Medicine (FIM) programs. Using focus groups with researchers and community-based organization (CBO) partners, along with an interview with a food vendor, the authors found that the FIM evidence base remains fragmented, with unresolved questions around optimal intervention dose, duration, measurement approaches, and the evidence needed to support payer coverage decisions. Participants emphasized that successful implementation depends on early and meaningful engagement of CBOs and vendors, clear partner roles, adequate organizational capacity, and balancing standardized program models with culturally tailored approaches. Trust-based relationships were viewed as critical for participant recruitment and retention, while technology was considered helpful but insufficient without strong human engagement. Stakeholders also highlighted significant operational challenges, including logistics, data infrastructure limitations, rural delivery barriers, and varying partner capacity. Finally, participants argued that long-term sustainability will require stronger national coordination, outcomes that extend beyond traditional clinical measures, and research that is more closely aligned with policy and payer decision-making needs.