Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33287395›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020

The Healthiness of Food and Beverages on Price Promotion at Promotional Displays: A Cross-Sectional Audit of Australian Supermarkets.

Lily Grigsby-Duffy, Sally Schultz, Liliana Orellana, Ella Robinson, Adrian J Cameron, Josephine Marshall, Kathryn Backholer, Gary Sacks

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Sustaining Health Promotion in Australian Supermarkets: Qualitative Perspectives From the Reach for the Stars Programme.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
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

8 authors.

Lily Grigsby-DuffyGlobal Obesity Centre (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria 3220, Australia.
Sally SchultzGlobal Obesity Centre (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria 3220, Australia.
Liliana OrellanaBiostatistics Unit, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria 3220, Australia.
Ella RobinsonGlobal Obesity Centre (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria 3220, Australia.
Adrian J CameronGlobal Obesity Centre (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria 3220, Australia.
Josephine MarshallGlobal Obesity Centre (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria 3220, Australia.
Kathryn BackholerGlobal Obesity Centre (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria 3220, Australia.
Gary SacksGlobal Obesity Centre (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria 3220, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Supermarket environments can strongly influence purchasing decisions. Price promotions are recognised as a particularly persuasive tactic, but the healthiness of price promotions in prominent in-store locations is understudied. This study compared the prevalence and magnitude of price promotions on healthy and unhealthy food and beverages (foods) displayed at prominent in-store locations within Australian supermarkets, including analyses by supermarket group and area-level socio-economic position. A cross-sectional in-store audit of price promotions on foods at key display areas was undertaken in 104 randomly selected stores from major Australian supermarket groups (Woolworths, Coles, Aldi and independents) in Victoria, Australia. Of the display space dedicated to foods with price promotions, three of the four supermarket groups had a greater proportion of display space devoted to unhealthy (compared to healthy) foods at each promotional location measured (end of aisles: 66%; island bins: 53%; checkouts: 88%). Aldi offered very few price promotions. Few measures varied by area-level socio-economic position. This study demonstrated that price promotions at prominent in-store locations in Australian supermarkets favoured unhealthy foods. Marketing of this nature is likely to encourage the purchase of unhealthy foods, highlighting the need for retailers and policy-makers to consider addressing in-store pricing and placement strategies to encourage healthier food environments.

Indexed as

BeveragesCommerceFoodFood MarketsCross-Sectional StudiesFood SupplySurveys and QuestionnairesVictoriafood environmentfood policyhealth equitynutritionprice promotion

Identifiers

PMID33287395
PMCPMC7729449

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.