ArticlePublic health nutrition2019
Artificial sweeteners in food and beverage products at school.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- District Wellness Policy Nutrition Standards Are Associated with Healthier District Food Procurement Practices in the United States.Nutrients · 2020Article
- Changing young people's food-related behaviour: a socio-ecological perspective.Public health nutrition · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveExperts recommend that products containing artificial sweeteners are not marketed to children or sold at schools. The present study aimed to provide a baseline assessment of the extent to which state laws and local school district wellness policies (LWP) address restrictions on the use of artificial sweeteners in competitive foods and beverages (CF&B) sold at schools.
designA descriptive, cross-sectional study of policies in place for the 2014-15 school year.
settingData were collected on laws in all fifty states and Washington, DC. LWP were compiled for 496/518 school food authorities (SFA) for which data were collected as part of the US Department of Agriculture's School Nutrition and Meal Cost Study. SUBJECTS: State laws and LWP respectively were coded on a 0-3 ordinal scale for the strength of their restrictions on artificial sweeteners in CF&B sold in each of five CF&B venues, separately by grade level. Prevalence of state laws and LWP for SFA nationwide was computed.
resultsThirteen states addressed the use of artificial sweeteners. Six states addressed the use of artificial sweeteners in both CF&B. District-level artificial sweetener policies were most frequently addressed for beverages in elementary schools' vending machines. District policies also were more likely to address artificial sweeteners in states with laws addressing artificial sweeteners.
conclusionsMost state laws and LWP do not address artificial sweeteners in CF&B. This is not surprising given the Food and Drug Administration has approved eight artificial sweeteners for consumption and the Smart Snacks regulation does not limit artificial sweeteners for CF&B.
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.