Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31113448›Full record

Trial reportThe international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity2019

Taxes and front-of-package labels improve the healthiness of beverage and snack purchases: a randomized experimental marketplace.

Rachel B Acton, Amanda C Jones, Sharon I Kirkpatrick, Christina A Roberto, David Hammond

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
14.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

68 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 125 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Health Warnings and Beverage Purchase Behavior: Mediators of Impact.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2020
    Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Rachel B ActonSchool of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave W, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2876-5668
Amanda C JonesDepartment of Public Health, University of Otago, Wellington, 23A Mein St., Newtown, Wellington, 6021, New Zealand.
Sharon I KirkpatrickSchool of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave W, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada.
Christina A RobertoDepartment of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 423 Guardian Drive, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
David HammondSchool of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave W, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada. david.hammond@uwaterloo.ca.
University of Waterloo · CAUniversity of Otago · NZUniversity of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

CIHR SAH-152808
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSugar taxes and front-of-package (FOP) nutrition labelling systems are strategies to address diet-related non-communicable diseases. However, there is relatively little experimental data on how these strategies influence consumer behavior and how they may interact. This study examined the relative impact of different sugar taxes and FOP labelling systems on beverage and snack food purchases.

methodsA total of 3584 Canadians 13 years and older participated in an experimental marketplace study using a 5 (FOP label condition) × 8 (tax condition) between-within group experiment. Participants received $5 and were presented with images of 20 beverages and 20 snack foods available for purchase. Participants were randomized to one of five FOP label conditions (no label; 'high in' warning; multiple traffic light; health star rating; nutrition grade) and completed eight within-subject purchasing tasks with different taxation conditions (beverages: no tax, 20% tax on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), 20% tax on sugary drinks, tiered tax on SSBs, tiered tax on sugary drinks; snack foods: no tax, 20% tax on high-sugar foods, tiered tax on high-sugar foods). Upon conclusion, one of eight selections was randomly chosen for purchase, and participants received the product and any change.

resultsCompared to those who saw no FOP label, participants who viewed the 'high in' symbol purchased less sugar (- 2.5 g), saturated fat (- 0.09 g), and calories (- 12.6 kcal) in the beverage purchasing tasks, and less sodium (- 13.5 mg) and calories (- 8.9 kcal) in the food tasks. All taxes resulted in substantial reductions in mean sugars (- 1.4 to - 4.7 g) and calories (- 5.3 to - 19.8 kcal) purchased, and in some cases, reductions in sodium (- 2.5 to - 6.6 mg) and saturated fat (- 0.03 to - 0.08 g). Taxes that included 100% fruit juice ('sugary drink' taxes) produced greater reductions in sugars and calories than those that did not.

conclusionsThis study expands the evidence indicating the effectiveness of sugar taxation and FOP labelling strategies in promoting healthy food and beverage choices. The results emphasize the importance of applying taxes to 100% fruit juice to maximize policy impact, and suggest that nutrient-specific FOP 'high in' labels may be more effective than other common labelling systems at reducing consumption of targeted nutrients.

Indexed as

Consumer BehaviorFood LabelingSnacksTaxesAdolescentAdultBeveragesCanadaFemaleHealth BehaviorHumansMaleMiddle AgedModels, EconomicYoung AdultExperimental marketplaceFront-of-package labelsHealth warningsSugar-sweetened beveragesSugar taxTaxes

Identifiers

PMID31113448
PMCPMC6528263
OpenAlexW2946168817

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.