Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32098363›Full record

ArticleNutrients2020

Experimental Studies of Front-of-Package Nutrient Warning Labels on Sugar-Sweetened Beverages and Ultra-Processed Foods: A Scoping Review.

Lindsey Smith Taillie, Marissa G Hall, Barry M Popkin, Shu Wen Ng, Nandita Murukutla

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrients, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 95 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
95citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

95 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. How pictorial warnings change parents' purchases of sugar-sweetened beverage for their children: mechanisms of impact.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2023
    Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Testing front-of-package warnings to discourage red meat consumption: a randomized experiment with US meat consumers.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2021
    Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

35 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.

Lindsey Smith TaillieDepartment of Nutrition, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 135 Dauer Dr, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
Marissa G HallDepartment of Health Behavior, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 135 Dauer Dr, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
Barry M PopkinDepartment of Nutrition, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 135 Dauer Dr, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9495-9324
Shu Wen NgDepartment of Nutrition, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 135 Dauer Dr, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0582-110X
Nandita MurukutlaVital Strategies, 100 Broadway 4th floor, New York, NY 10005, USA.

Funding

Designing and Evaluating High-Impact Pictorial Health Warnings for Food ProductsK01HL147713 · NHLBI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI HALL, MARISSA · 2019 to 2023
$738k
Bloomberg Philanthropies N/ANHLBI NIH HHS K01 HL147713NHLBI NIH HHS K01HL147713
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Policies that require front-of-package (FoP) nutrient warnings are becoming increasingly common across the globe as a strategy to discourage excess consumption of sugary drinks and ultra-processed food. However, a better understanding of the pathway through which FoP nutrient warnings work, as well as a review of how outcomes being measured in recent studies map onto this pathway, are needed in order to inform policy on the most effective FoP label design for reducing purchases of ultra-processed foods. This scoping review describes a conceptual model for how FoP nutrient warnings affect consumer behavior, examines which of these outcomes are currently being measured, and summarizes evidence from randomized controlled experiments. Twenty-two studies which experimentally tested nutrient warnings against a control label or other labeling systems were included for full-text review. Our conceptual model includes attention; comprehension, cognitive elaboration, and message acceptance; negative affect and risk perception; behavioral intentions, and behavioral response, along with other elements such as external factors and interpersonal communications. We found that many studies focused on outcomes such as attention, comprehension, and behavioral intentions, but considerable gaps in the evidence remain, particularly for intermediary steps on the pathway to behavioral change, such as negative affect and social interactions. FoP nutrient warnings were visually attended to by consumers, easy to understand, helped consumers identify products high in nutrients of concern, and discouraged them from purchasing these products, although other labeling systems were perceived as containing more information and performed better at helping consumers rank the healthfulness of products. More research is needed to understand whether and how nutrient warnings work in the real world to discourage consumer purchases of sugary drinks and ultra-processed food.

Indexed as

Consumer BehaviorAttentionComprehensionFast FoodsFood LabelingFood PreferencesHealth PromotionHumansNutrition PolicyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSocial InteractionSugar-Sweetened BeveragesTreatment Outcomefood labelingfood policyfront-of-package labelsobesity preventionwarning labels

Identifiers

PMID32098363
PMCPMC7071470

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.