Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32943071›Full record

SynthesisNutrition journal2020

The effects of nudges on purchases, food choice, and energy intake or content of purchases in real-life food purchasing environments: a systematic review and evidence synthesis.

Marjolein C Harbers, Joline W J Beulens, Femke Rutters, Femke de Boer, Marleen Gillebaart, Ivonne Sluijs, Yvonne T van der Schouw

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Nutrition journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
9.6field-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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 115 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Marjolein C HarbersJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, P.O. box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands. m.c.harbers@umcutrecht.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-2312-5899
Joline W J BeulensJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, P.O. box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Femke RuttersDepartment of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Femke de BoerDepartment of Social Health and Organizational Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Marleen GillebaartDepartment of Social Health and Organizational Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Ivonne SluijsJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, P.O. box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Yvonne T van der SchouwJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, P.O. box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Utrecht University · NLAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdults with a low socioeconomic position (SEP) are more likely to engage in unhealthy diets as compared to adults with high SEP. However, individual-level educational interventions aiming to improve food choices have shown limited effectiveness in adults with low SEP. Environmental-level interventions such as nudging strategies however, may be more likely to benefit low SEP groups. We aimed to review the evidence for the effectiveness of nudges as classified according to interventions in proximal physical micro-environments typology (TIPPME) to promote healthy purchases, food choice, or affecting energy intake or content of purchases, within real-life food purchasing environments. Second, we aimed to investigate the potentially moderating role of SEP.

methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, and PsycINFO until 31 January 2018. Studies were considered eligible for inclusion when they i) complied with TIPPME intervention definitions; ii) studied actual purchases, food choice, or energy intake or content of purchases, iii) and were situated in real-life food purchasing environments. Risk of bias was assessed using a quality assessment tool and evidence was synthesized using harvest plots.

resultsFrom the 9210 references identified, 75 studies were included. Studies were generally of weak to moderate quality. The most frequently studied nudges were information (56%), mixed (24%), and position nudges (13%). Harvest plots showed modest tendencies towards beneficial effects on outcomes for information and position nudges. Less evidence was available for other TIPPME nudging interventions for which the harvest plots did not show compelling patterns. Only six studies evaluated the effects of nudges across levels of SEP (e.g., educational level, food security status, job type). Although there were some indications that nudges were more effective in low SEP groups, the limited amount of evidence and different proxies of SEP used warrant caution in the interpretation of findings.

conclusionsInformation and position nudges may contribute to improving population dietary behaviours. Evidence investigating the moderating role of SEP was limited, although some studies reported greater effects in low SEP subgroups. We conclude that more high-quality studies obtaining detailed data on participant's SEP are needed. REGISTRATION: This systematic review is registered in the PROSPERO database ( CRD42018086983 ).

Indexed as

Energy IntakeFood PreferencesAdultConsumer BehaviorDietFoodHumansChoice architectureNudgingSocioeconomic positionTIPPME

Identifiers

PMID32943071
PMCPMC7500553
OpenAlexW3085904147

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.