ArticleBMJ open2017
Perception of different formats of front-of-pack nutrition labels according to sociodemographic, lifestyle and dietary factors in a French population: cross-sectional study among the NutriNet-Santé cohort participants.
Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
42 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 88 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Five Types of Front-of-Package Nutrition Labels on Consumer Behavior among Young Adults: A Systematic Review.Nutrients · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- A Meta-Analysis of Food Labeling Effects on Consumer Diet Behaviors and Industry Practices.American journal of preventive medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Front-of-Package Labels on Unhealthy Packaged Foods in India: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment.Nutrients · 2022Trial
- The Effect of a Future-Self Avatar Mobile Health Intervention (FutureMe) on Physical Activity and Food Purchases: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Trial
- Trial
- Performance and perception on front-of-package nutritional labeling models in Brazil.Revista de saude publica · 2021Trial
- A randomized controlled trial examining consumers' perceptions and opinions on using different versions of a FoodFlip© smartphone application for delivery of nutrition information.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2020Trial
- Dish-Choice, a Three-Color Food Label, Improves Subjective Perceptions of Nutrition Information Among Chinese Diners Compared with a Standard Nutrition Facts Label: A Self-Controlled Survey.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Directive vs. Reductive Front-of-Pack Labels: Differences in Italian Consumers' Responses to the Nutri-Score and the NutrInform Battery.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Development of a Nutrient Profile Model for Dishes in Japan Version 1.0: A New Step towards Addressing Public Health Nutrition Challenges.Nutrients · 2024Article
- The Impact of Political Orientation and Government Change on Public Satisfaction with Food Policy in South Korea.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Smartphone Apps for Food Purchase Choices: Scoping Review of Designs, Opportunities, and Challenges.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- A Little Bird Told Me… Nutri-Score Panoramas from a Flight over Europe, Connecting Science and Society.Nutrients · 2023Article
- Initiatives to Reduce the Content of Sodium in Food Products and Meals and Improve the Population's Health.Nutrients · 2023Review
- Nutri-Score: Awareness, Perception and Self-Reported Impact on Food Choices among French Adolescents.Nutrients · 2022Article
- Health Literacy and Its Associations with Understanding and Perception of Front-of-Package Nutrition Labels among Higher Education Students.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Types and Aspects of Front-of-Package Labeling Preferred by Parents: Insights for Policy Making in China.Nutrients · 2022Article
- Is it really a piece of cake to label Geographical Indications with the Nutri-Score? Consumers' behaviour and policy implications.PloS one · 2022Article
- Comparison of appropriateness of Nutri-Score and other front-of-pack nutrition labels across a group of Moroccan consumers: awareness, understanding and food choices.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveFour formats for a front-of-pack (FOP) nutrition label are currently considered in France: the Nutriscore (or 5-Colour Nutrition Label, developed by a public research team), the SENS (supported by retailers), Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL, currently used in UK) and a modified version of the Reference Intakes (mRIs, supported by industry). Our objective was to investigate the perception of these FOP labels, according to sociodemographic, lifestyle and dietary factors.
designCross-sectional study.
settingWeb-based French cohort.
main outcome measureFOP labels perception.
participantsParticipants in the NutriNet-Santé cohort received a specific questionnaire on the perceptions of the four label formats identified. Sociodemographic, lifestyle and dietary data (three 24-hours dietary records) were collected through self-administered questionnaires. Mutually exclusive clusters of FOP labels perception were identified through a multiple correspondence analysis followed by a hierarchical clustering procedure. Sociodemographic, lifestyle and dietary factors associated with the clusters were explored using multivariable multinomial logistic regression. All analyses were weighted according to 2009 French census data.
resultsAmong the 21,702 participants in the study, the Nutriscore received the most important number of favourable responses on positive perception dimensions by participants, followed by MTL and SENS. The five identified clusters were characterised by marked preferences for Nutriscore (cluster 1, 43.2% of participants, crude n=9,399), MTL (cluster 2, 27.3%, crude n=6,163), SENS (cluster 3, 17.05%, crude n=3,546), mRIs (cluster 4, 7.31%, crude n=1,632) and none of the presented formats (cluster 5, 5.10%, crude n=965). The cluster 1 (Nutriscore) was associated with lower adherence to nutritional recommendations, while cluster 2 (MTL) was associated with younger age and higher level of education.
conclusionThe Nutriscore appears to have a wide reach in the population and to appeal to subjects with lower adherence to nutritional recommendations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.