Trial reportPublic health nutrition2020
Testing the efficacy of and parents' preferences for nutrition labels on children's menus from a full-service chain restaurant: results of an online experiment.
Trial report in Public health nutrition, 2020. 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.
- Online RCT of Icon Added-Sugar Warning Labels for Restaurant Menus.American journal of preventive medicine · 2023Trial
- Perceived effectiveness of added-sugar warning label designs for U.S. restaurant menus: An online randomized controlled trial.Preventive medicine · 2022Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTest the efficacy and perceived effectiveness of nutrition labels on children's menus from a full-service chain restaurant in an online study.
designUsing a between-groups experiment, parents were randomised to view children's menus displaying one of five children's nutrition labelling conditions: (i) No Nutrition Information (control); (ii) Calories Only; (iii) Calories + Contextual Statement (CS); (iv) Calories, Sodium + CS; or (v) Calories and Sodium in Traffic Lights + CS. Parents hypothetically ordered up to one entrée, side, beverage and dessert for their child, then rated and ranked all five labelling conditions on the level of perceived effectiveness.
settingOnline survey.
participants998 parents with a 3-12 year old child.
resultsParents exposed to menus displaying 'Calories, Sodium + CS' selected significantly fewer calories 'overall' (entrées + side + dessert + beverage) compared to parents exposed to the control condition (-53·1 calories, P < 0·05). Parents selected 'entrees' with significantly fewer calories and lower sodium when exposed to menus with 'Calories + CS' (-24·3 calories, P < 0·05); 'Calories, Sodium + CS' (-25·4 calories, -56·1 mg sodium, P < 0·05 for both); and 'Calories and Sodium in Traffic Lights + CS' (-29·1 calories, -58·6 mg sodium, P < 0·05 for both). Parents exposed to menus with 'Calories, Sodium + CS' and 'Calories and Sodium in Traffic Lights + CS' were more likely to notice and understand nutrition information compared to other nuntrition labelling conditions. Parents perceived the menu with 'Calories and Sodium in Traffic Lights + CS' as most effective (P < 0·05).
conclusionsMenus disclosing calories, sodium and a contextual statement increased the proportion of parents who noticed and understood nutrition information, and resulted in parents selecting lower calorie and sodium entrées for their children in the hypothetical purchase task.
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.