Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35565886›Full record

ArticleNutrients2022

Cost-Benefit and Cost-Utility Analyses to Demonstrate the Potential Value-for-Money of Supermarket Shelf Tags Promoting Healthier Packaged Products in Australia.

Jaithri Ananthapavan, Gary Sacks, Liliana Orellana, Josephine Marshall, Ella Robinson, Marj Moodie, Miranda Blake, Amy Brown, Rob Carter, Adrian J Cameron

Open access · goldAbstract readControlled Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrients, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jaithri AnanthapavanDeakin Health Economics, School of Health and Social Development, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong 3220, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5957-6931
Gary SacksGlobal Obesity Centre, School of Health and Social Development, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong 3220, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9736-1539
Liliana OrellanaBiostatistics Unit, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong 3220, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3736-4337
Josephine MarshallGlobal Obesity Centre, School of Health and Social Development, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong 3220, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1189-3927
Ella RobinsonGlobal Obesity Centre, School of Health and Social Development, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong 3220, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1960-0703
Marj MoodieDeakin Health Economics, School of Health and Social Development, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong 3220, Australia.
Miranda BlakeGlobal Obesity Centre, School of Health and Social Development, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong 3220, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0649-2320
Amy BrownCity of Greater Bendigo Council, Bendigo 3550, Australia.
Rob CarterDeakin Health Economics, School of Health and Social Development, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong 3220, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1586-5619
Adrian J CameronGlobal Obesity Centre, School of Health and Social Development, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong 3220, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0568-5497
Deakin University · AUBendigo Health · AU

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council 2021/GNT2008535National Health and Medical Research Council APP1152968National Health and Medical Research Council GNT9100001National Heart Foundation of Australia 102035National Heart Foundation of Australia 102611Victorian Health Promotion Foundation 22510
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The supermarket environment impacts the healthiness of food purchased and consumed. Shelf tags that alert customers to healthier packaged products can improve the healthiness of overall purchases. This study assessed the potential value-for-money of implementing a three-year shelf tag intervention across all major supermarket chains in Australia. Cost-benefit analyses (CBA) and cost-utility analyses (CUA) were conducted based on results of a 12-week non-randomised controlled trial of a shelf tag intervention in seven Australian supermarkets. The change in energy density of all packaged foods purchased during the trial was used to estimate population-level changes in mean daily energy intake. A multi-state, multiple-cohort Markov model estimated the subsequent obesity-related health and healthcare cost outcomes over the lifetime of the 2019 Australian population. The CBA and CUA took societal and healthcare sector perspectives, respectively. The intervention was estimated to produce a mean reduction in population body weight of 1.09 kg. The net present value of the intervention was approximately AUD 17 billion (B). Over 98% of the intervention costs were borne by supermarkets. CUA findings were consistent with the CBA-the intervention was dominant, producing both health benefits and cost-savings. Shelf tags are likely to offer excellent value-for-money from societal and healthcare sector perspectives.

Indexed as

Consumer BehaviorFood MarketsAustraliaCost-Benefit AnalysisFood PreferencesHumanscost–benefit analysiscost–utility analysiseconomic evaluationhealthy retailshelf tagsupermarket

Identifiers

PMID35565886
PMCPMC9103654
OpenAlexW4225397990

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.