ArticleArchives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique2020
Bulgarian consumers' objective understanding of front-of-package nutrition labels: a comparative, randomized study.
Article in Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Little Bird Told Me… Nutri-Score Panoramas from a Flight over Europe, Connecting Science and Society.Nutrients · 2023Article
- Article
- Understanding of the Nutri-Score front-of-pack label by Italian Medical Professionals and its effect on food choices: a web-based study on knowledge, attitudes and practices.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2022Article
- Polish Consumers' Understanding of Different Front-of-Package Food Labels: A Randomized Experiment.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Analysis of Content, Social Networks, and Sentiment of Front-of-Pack Nutrition Labeling in the European Union on Twitter.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
- Article
- Who Reads Food Labels? Selected Predictors of Consumer Interest in Front-of-Package and Back-of-Package Labels during and after the Purchase.Nutrients · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBulgaria continues to lag behind other EU Member States with respect to chronic disease morbidity and mortality prevention.
methodsIn line with efforts targeting the improvement of dietary practices, this comparative study assessed objective understanding of five different front-of-package labels (FOPL) (Reference Intakes, Multiple Traffic Lights, Warning label, Nutri-Score, and Health Star Rating) in a sample of 1010 Bulgarian adults. Objective understanding was assessed by comparing the results of two nutritional quality ranking tasks (with and without FOPL) in an online randomized experiment featuring three food categories (pizza, cakes, breakfast cereals). Multivariable ordinal logistic regression models within and across food categories were fit.
resultsCompared with the Reference Intakes group, participants randomized to Nutri-Score exhibited the largest improvement in product ranking ability across food categories (OR = 2.33; 95% CI: 1.55-3.51), followed by those randomized to Health Star Rating (OR = 1.99; 95% CI: 1.32-3.00). Nutri-Score also performed best within two (pizza and breakfast cereals) of the three food categories. The Multiple Traffic Lights and Warning label groups did not display any significant improvement in objective understanding either within or across food categories compared with the Reference Intakes group.
conclusionNutri-Score, which is a summary, interpretive, polychromatic FOPL, emerged as the most effective model in the Bulgarian context, with the potential to help consumers better understand the nutritional quality of food. The findings are of particular interest to public health policymakers in the region and across Europe, as the debate about an EU-wide FOPL model continues to gather momentum.
trial registrationRegistration number ACTRN12618001221246. Trial registered at the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry.
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.