ReviewNutrients2022
Are Front-of-Pack Labels a Health Policy Tool?
Review in Nutrients, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Observational
- Nutritional contents, nutritional quality and manufacturer of ready foods in China: a cross-sectional study of 2087 food products.Nutrition & diabetes · 2026Article
- Alignment with front-of-package labeling policy and risk of hospitalization: evidence from Canadian National Nutrition Survey linked to routinely collected health administrative databases.The American journal of clinical nutrition · 2026Article
- Validation of the food compass score through 24 h recalls and measurement of erythrocyte fatty acids in a mediterranean population.European journal of nutrition · 2026Article
- A scoping review of assessment of front-of-pack labeling policy implementation and response in low-and middle-income countries.Public health nutrition · 2025Article
- Recognizing the ethical complexity of food policies and the role of the food industry.Health promotion international · 2024Article
- Food Compass Score and its association with inflammatory markers and homocysteine in cardiovascular disease-free adults: a cross-sectional analysis of the ATTICA epidemiological study.European journal of clinical nutrition · 2023Article
- Attitudes and perceived knowledge of health professionals on the food labelling reform in Israel.Public health nutrition · 2023Article
- How to communicate the healthiness and sustainability of foods to consumers?Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- Article
- Clinical Application of the Food Compass Score: Positive Association to Mediterranean Diet Score, Health Star Rating System and an Early Eating Pattern in University Students.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To stem the increasing incidence of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and obesity, front-of-pack labels (FOPLs) have been developed since 1989. Whereas several countries have already adopted one voluntarily, the European Community wants to harmonize an FOPL system that will be mandatory for all member states. The purpose of this narrative review is to describe what could be achieved or not by FOPLs, and to discuss if there is enough evidence to establish whether such labels are effective in modifying purchasing behavior, in directing individual dietary patterns towards a healthy and sustainable diet, and in reformulating food products by the food industry. Non-directive FOPLs, which are still under study, appear to be informative and well-accepted by consumers even if they require a cognitive effort. Conversely, directive FOPLs are supported by several studies, but they are mostly conducted in simulated scenarios and/or performed as retrospective studies. Nevertheless, directive FOPLs are rated as an intuitive tool, and they have demonstrated a high capacity to help consumers rank food products as more or less healthy. In conclusion, directive and non-directive FOPLs convey different messages. No FOPL individually can be considered exhaustive in relation to all the objectives outlined in this narrative review, and therefore, the development of a model synthesizing both messages is advisable. Many questions remain open, such as the possibility of reformulating pre-packaged products, how to deal with traditional products, and the impact on the incidence of NCDs and obesity. In the light of the complexity of factors that condition consumption choices and health, none of the current FOPLs can be considered a health policy tool on its own. The possibility of development remains open, but as the state of the art, these tools do not seem to be able to achieve all the European Community goals together. We can speculate that they could meet these goals only if they are integrated into a multi-tiered, structured health policy intervention.
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.