ReviewPublic health nutrition2019
Front-of-pack nutrition labelling in the European region: identifying what works for governments and consumers.
Review 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 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Article
- Beyond Nutrient Profiling: Strengths, Limitations, and Emerging Challenges for Nutri-Score and Related Front-of-Pack Labeling Systems.Nutrients · 2026Review
- Prevalence of sustainability claims on packaged food.Public health nutrition · 2026Article
- Designing front-of-pack labels for packaged food in low-literacy contexts: Consumer perspectives from India.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Enhanced Labeling to Promote Consumption of Nutrient Dense Foods and Healthier Diets.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Hypothetical impact of the Mexican front-of-pack labeling on intake of critical nutrients and energy.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2023Article
- Effect of a new graphically modified Nutri-Score on the objective understanding of foods' nutrient profile and ultraprocessing: a randomised controlled trial.BMJ nutrition, prevention & health · 2023Article
- A review of front-of-pack nutrition labelling in Southeast Asia: Industry interference, lessons learned, and future directions.The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia · 2022Review
- Development of uniform food information -the case of front of package nutrition labels in the EU.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2022Article
- Impact of the Front-of-Pack Label Nutri-Score on the Nutritional Quality of Food Choices in a Quasi-Experimental Trial in Catering.Nutrients · 2021Article
- An assessment of nutrition information on front of pack labels and healthiness of foods in the United Kingdom retail market.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Development of Criteria for a Positive Front-of-Package Food Labeling: The Israeli Case.Nutrients · 2020Article
- Nutritional Sustainability Inside-Marketing Sustainability as an Inherent Ingredient.Frontiers in nutrition · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe present commentary introduces a Health Evidence Network (HEN) report that synthesises evidence of front-of-pack food labelling (FOPL) policy development and implementation across the European Region.
designCountries were identified as having policies on interpretive FOPL from the WHO databases of Member State policies and online repositories of global food policies. For each identified country, evidence published from 1 January 1980 to 31 March 2018 was retrieved from peer-reviewed and grey literature. Extracted data were cross-checked with in-country representatives to ensure completeness and accuracy.
settingWHO European Region, spanning fifty-three countries.
resultsFifteen countries had a government-endorsed policy on interpretive FOPL. Thirteen of these countries had introduced endorsement logos, while only three labelling systems provided an indicator for unhealthfulness. Common steps were identified in FOPL policy development, including: establishing FOPL as a nutrition policy priority; engaging stakeholders and the public; and collecting formative evidence on which to base the labelling system. Few countries had outlined formal provisions for evaluation of FOPL systems. The HEN report describes seven considerations for the adoption/review of FOPL policies to ensure these achieve the population nutrition aims of FOPL. These considerations relate to supporting consumer use and understanding of the labelling, policy feasibility and credibility, and ensuring policy implementation and accountability.
conclusionsThe HEN report encourages countries to consider FOPL policy that is applied widely across all products and provides negative evaluative judgements, possibly combined with positive indicators. Implementation provisions should drive widespread uptake of the system and allow for formal evaluation of impact.
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.