Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35594928›Full record

Trial reportPreventive medicine2022

Perceived effectiveness of added-sugar warning label designs for U.S. restaurant menus: An online randomized controlled trial.

Desiree M Sigala, Marissa G Hall, Aviva A Musicus, Christina A Roberto, Sarah E Solar, Sili Fan, Sarah Sorscher, DeAnna Nara, Jennifer Falbe

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Preventive medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04637412 (Perceived Effectiveness of Added Sugar Labels), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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.

NCT04637412 nacompletednot on this map

Perceived Effectiveness of Added Sugar Labels

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of California, DavisRan2020 to 2020Enrolled1,448ConditionsHealth Knowledge, Attitude to HealthArmsMenu label
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Online RCT of Icon Added-Sugar Warning Labels for Restaurant Menus.American journal of preventive medicine · 2023
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Desiree M SigalaDepartment of Molecular Biosciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California Davis, 1 Shields Ave, Davis, CA 95616, USA. Electronic address: dmsigala@ucdavis.edu.
Marissa G HallDepartment of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health; Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center; and Carolina Population Center; University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, 170 Rosenau Hall, CB #7400, 135 Dauer Drive, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA. Electronic address: mghall@unc.edu.
Aviva A MusicusDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, 677 Huntington Ave, Boston, MA 02115, USA. Electronic address: aam231@mail.harvard.edu.
Christina A RobertoDepartment of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Civic Center Blvd, Building 421, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Electronic address: croberto@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.
Sarah E SolarHuman Development and Family Studies Program, Department of Human Ecology, University of California Davis, 1 Shields Ave, Davis, CA 95616, USA. Electronic address: sesolar@ucdavis.edu.
Sili FanDepartment of Statistics, University of California Davis, 1 Shields Ave, Davis, CA 95616, USA. Electronic address: slfan@ucdavis.edu.
Sarah SorscherThe Center for Science in the Public Interest, 1220 L St. N.W., Suite 300, Washington, D.C. 20005, USA. Electronic address: ssorscher@cspinet.org.
DeAnna NaraThe Center for Science in the Public Interest, 1220 L St. N.W., Suite 300, Washington, D.C. 20005, USA. Electronic address: dnara@cspinet.org.
Jennifer FalbeHuman Development and Family Studies Program, Department of Human Ecology, University of California Davis, 1 Shields Ave, Davis, CA 95616, USA. Electronic address: jfalbe@ucdavis.edu.
University of California, Davis · USCenter for Science in the Public Interest (United States) · USHarvard University · USUNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer CenterUniversity of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

The effects of orange juice compared with sugar-sweetened beverage on risk factors and metabolic processes associated with the development of cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetesR01HL137716 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI STANHOPE, KIMBER LEE · 2018 to 2022
$4.1M
The Harvard Chan Education Program in Cancer Prevention and ControlT32CA057711 · NCI · HARVARD UNIVERSITY D/B/A HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI Karen M. Emmons, ANNE LINDSAY FRAZIER · 2019 to 2026
$3.3M
Reducing sugar-sweetened beverage consumption among young adults: A point-of-selection experimentK01DK113068 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI FALBE, JENNIFER · 2018 to 2022
$814k
Designing and Evaluating High-Impact Pictorial Health Warnings for Food ProductsK01HL147713 · NHLBI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI HALL, MARISSA · 2019 to 2023
$738k
NCI NIH HHS T32 CA057711NHLBI NIH HHS K01 HL147713NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL137716NIDDK NIH HHS K01 DK113068
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Added-sugar consumption in the U.S. exceeds recommended limits. Policymakers are considering requiring restaurants to use menu warning labels to indicate items high in added sugar. We sought to determine whether icon-only and icon-plus-text added-sugar menu labels were (1) perceived as more effective at potentially reducing consumption of items high in added sugar and (2) increased knowledge of menu items' added-sugar content relative to control labels, and if effects differed by label design. A national sample of U.S. adults (n = 1327) participated in an online randomized experiment. Participants viewed menu items with either a control label, 1 of 6 icon-only labels, or 1 of 18 icon-plus-text labels with 3 text variations. For their assigned label, participants provided ratings of perceived message effectiveness (a validated scale of a message's potential to change behavior). Participants were also asked to classify menu items by their added-sugar content. The icon-only and icon-plus-text labels were perceived as more effective than the control label (means: 3.7 and 3.7 vs. 3.1, respectively, on a 5-point scale; p < 0.001). The icon-only and icon-plus-text groups each correctly classified 71% of menu items by added-sugar content vs. 56% in the control group (p < 0.001). All icons and text variations were perceived as similarly effective. In conclusion, relative to a control label, icon-only and icon-plus-text added-sugar menu labels were perceived as effective and helped consumers identify items high in added sugar. Menu warning labels may be a promising strategy for reducing added-sugar consumption from restaurants, but research on behavioral effects in real-world settings is needed. Clinical Trials Identifier:NCT04637412.

Indexed as

Food LabelingRestaurantsAdultDietary SugarsHumansSugarsDietary SugarsSugarsAdded sugarPerceived message effectivenessPolicyRestaurant menuWarning labels

Identifiers

PMID35594928
PMCPMC9236625
OpenAlexW4280632022

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.