Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27496103›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2016

The Effect of Energy Labelling on Menus and a Social Marketing Campaign on Food-Purchasing Behaviours of University Students.

Rajshri Roy, Jack Beattie-Bowers, Siew Min Ang, Stephen Colagiuri, Margaret Allman-Farinelli

Abstract readControlled Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Understanding and acceptability by Hispanic consumers of four front-of-pack food labels.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Rajshri RoySchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Level 4, E40, D17, Sydney, NSW, Australia. rroy3593@uni.sydney.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-7939-1790
Jack Beattie-BowersSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Level 4, E40, D17, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Siew Min AngSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Level 4, E40, D17, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Stephen ColagiuriSydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Margaret Allman-FarinelliSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Level 4, E40, D17, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study assessed the impact of kilojoule (kJ) labelling alone or accompanied by a social marketing campaign on food sales and selection of less energy-dense meals by young adults from a university food outlet.

methodsThere were two kJ labelling intervention phases each of five weeks: (1) kJ labelling alone (2) kJ labels with marketing materials ("8700 kJ campaign"). Food sales of labelled items were tracked during each intervention and five weeks after. Food sales during interventions were also compared with historical sales of foods in the same 10-week period in the previous year. A sub sample of young adults (n = 713; aged 19-24) were surveyed during both the interventions to assess awareness, influence, sentiment and anticipated future impact of kJ labels and the social marketing campaign respectively.

resultsThere were no differences in sales between the kJ labelling with social marketing and the 5-weeks of labelling before and after. The percentage sale of chicken Caesar burger (3580 kJ, P = 0.01), steak and chips (4000 kJ, P = 0.02) and the grill burger (5500 kJ, P = 0.00) were lower in the year with menu labelling and social marketing campaign. Only 30 % students were initially aware of the kJ labels on the menu but 75 % of students were accepting of kJ labelling, after they were made aware. Respondents viewing the marketing campaign elements and then using kJ values on the menu selected meals with a lower mean energy content; constituting a reduction of 978 kJ (p < 0.01) even though the majority claimed that the 8700 kJ campaign would not impact their food choices.

conclusionsPoint-of-purchase energy labelling may be an effective method to encourage better food choices when eating out among young adults. However, further efforts to increase awareness and provide education about energy requirements to prevent weight gain will be needed.

Indexed as

Energy IntakeFood PreferencesRestaurantsSocial MarketingStudentsUniversitiesAdultCommerceFemaleFood LabelingHumansMaleMarketingMealsNutritional RequirementsProduct LabelingFood choicesMenu labellingUniversityYoung adults

Identifiers

PMID27496103
PMCPMC4974729

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.