Trial reportEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2014
Consumer attitudes and understanding of cholesterol-lowering claims on food: randomize mock-package experiments with plant sterol and oat fibre claims.
Trial report in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Nutritional Description of Processed Foods with Fibre-Related Nutrition Claims in Spain: The BADALI Project.Nutrients · 2023Article
- A taste of things to come: Effect of temporal order of information and product experience on evaluation of healthy and sustainable plant-based products.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
- Examining the Prevalence, Nutritional Quality and Marketing of Foods with Voluntary Nutrient Additions in the Canadian Food Supply.Nutrients · 2021Article
- Article
- Consumers' Implicit and Explicit Recall, Understanding and Perceptions of Products with Nutrition-Related Messages: An Online Survey.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Article
- Assessment of Packaged Foods and Beverages Carrying Nutrition Marketing against Canada's Food Guide Recommendations.Nutrients · 2019Article
- Consumer beliefs about healthy foods and diets.PloS one · 2019Article
- Do manufacturer 'nutrient claims' influence the efficacy of mandated front-of-package labels?Public health nutrition · 2018Article
- Can front-of-pack labels influence portion size judgements for unhealthy foods?Public health nutrition · 2018Article
- Do Health Claims and Front-of-Pack Labels Lead to a Positivity Bias in Unhealthy Foods?Nutrients · 2016Article
- Dietary fibre intakes and reduction in functional constipation rates among Canadian adults: a cost-of-illness analysis.Food & nutrition research · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesFew studies have examined consumer acceptability or comprehension of cholesterol-lowering claims on food labels. Our objective was to assess consumer attitudes and understanding of cholesterol-lowering claims regarding plant sterols (PS) and oat fibre (OF). SUBJECTS/
methodsWe conducted two studies on: (1) PS claims and (2) OF claims. Both studies involved a randomized mock-packaged experiment within an online survey administered to Canadian consumers. In the PS study (n=721), we tested three PS-related claims (disease risk reduction claim, function claim and nutrient content claim) and a 'tastes great' claim (control) on identical margarine containers. Similarly, in the OF study (n=710), we tested three claims related to OF and a 'taste great' claim on identical cereal boxes. In both studies, participants answered the same set of questions on attitudes and understanding of claims after seeing each mock package.
resultsAll claims that mentioned either PS or OF resulted in more positive attitudes than the taste control claim (P<0.0001), despite all products within each study having the same nutrition profile. How consumers responded to the nutrition claims between the two studies was influenced by contextual factors such as familiarity with the functional food/component and the food product that carried the claim.
conclusionsPermitted nutrition claims are approved based on physiological evidence and are allowed on any food product as long as it meets the associated nutrient criteria. However, it is difficult to generalize attitudes and understanding of claims when they are so highly dependent on contextual factors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24918122What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.