Trial reportThe international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity2020
A randomized controlled trial examining consumers' perceptions and opinions on using different versions of a FoodFlip© smartphone application for delivery of nutrition information.
Trial report in The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 10 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.
The Efficacy of Front-of-package Labelling Schemes: an Experimental Study
A Randomized Controlled Trial Using FoodFlip©, a Mobile Phone App, to Promote Healthier Diets and Food Choices Among Post-Secondary Students
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Digital Interventions on Healthy Lifestyle Management: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- Traffic Light Labels and Dietary Behavior Change: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2025Trial
- The efficacy of 'high in' warning labels, health star and traffic light front-of-package labelling: an online randomised control trial.Public health nutrition · 2021Trial
- Assessing the extent to which front-of-pack labelling regulations could support healthy eating among Canadians.PloS one · 2025Article
- Estimating the dietary and health impact of implementing front-of-pack nutrition labeling in Canada: A macrosimulation modeling study.Frontiers in nutrition · 2023Article
- E-&mHealth interventions targeting nutrition, physical activity, sedentary behavior, and/or obesity among children: A scoping review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2021Article
- The Availability and Quality of Food Labelling Components in the Canadian E-Grocery Retail Environment.Nutrients · 2021Article
- Short and Long-Term Innovations on Dietary Behavior Assessment and Coaching: Present Efforts and Vision of the Pride and Prejudice Consortium.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Development of the Food Label Information Program: A Comprehensive Canadian Branded Food Composition Database.Frontiers in nutrition · 2021Article
- Consumers' Implicit and Explicit Recall, Understanding and Perceptions of Products with Nutrition-Related Messages: An Online Survey.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFood labelling is a common intervention to improve diets, where the back-of-pack Nutrition Information Panel (or Nutrition Facts table (NFt)) provides comprehensive nutrition information on food packages. However, many consumers find it difficult and time-consuming to identify healthier foods using the NFt. As a result, different interpretative nutrition rating systems (INRS) may enable healthier food choices and it is essential that consumers have the tools to allow for easily accessible nutrition information. The objective of this study was to examine consumers' perceptions of different (INRS) for delivery of nutrition information using different versions of a smartphone app, FoodFlip©.
methodsThis study was part of a larger randomized controlled trial examining consumer perceptions of different INRS on food products. A nationally representative commercial sample of 2008 Canadians were randomized to one of four INRS intervention groups: 1) traffic light, 2) health star rating, 3) 'high-in' warning labels or 4) no INRS (NFt only; control) and asked to scan or enter 20 products into FoodFlip© from a list of food products provided to them with varying levels of healthfulness. After completing the app task, participants were asked a series of 7-point Likert-scale and open-ended questions to provide opinions on the usability and functionality of the app.
resultsOf the survey sample of 1997 participants, 95% (n = 1907) completed the app task, with similar number of participants in each treatment group. The mean age was 40 ± 12 years with no differences in sociodemographic characteristics between treatment groups. The health star rating ranked significantly lower in comparison to the other treatment groups in terms of usefulness (OR, 95% CI -0.67, 0.52-0.85), believability (0.59, 0.46-0.75), and understanding (0.55, 0.44-0.71) (p < 0.001). The health star rating (1.20, 0.94-1.53) and control (NFt) (1,1,1) ranked significantly lower than the traffic light or the 'high-in' warning labels for their ability to compare the healthfulness of products (p < 0.001).
conclusionThis study demonstrated Canadian consumers' preference for a nutrient-specific system (i.e. traffic light or 'high-in' warning labels). The app, which was liked by majority of the participants for its functionality and usability, has the potential to support healthy dietary decision making and may also encourage reformulation.
trial registrationNCT03290118 (Clinicaltrials.gov).
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.