ArticlePloS one2022
Children's, parents' and professional stakeholders' views on power concerning the regulation of online advertising of unhealthy food to young people in the UK: A qualitative study.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A scoping review of children's and parents' attitudes to and awareness of digital food marketing.Health promotion international · 2025Article
- Australian parents' perceptions of the risks posed by harmful products to the health of children.Health promotion international · 2024Article
- "It's changing our lives, not for the better. It's important that we have a say". The role of young people in informing public health and policy decisions about gambling marketing.BMC public health · 2024Article
- 'You can't really separate these risks, our environment, our animals and us': Australian children's perceptions of the risks of the climate crisis.Health promotion international · 2024Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Examinations of corporate power have demonstrated the practices and activities Unhealthy Commodity Industries (UCIs) employ to exert their power and influence on the public and health policy. The High in Fat Sugar and Salt (HFSS) product industry have exploited the online environment to market their products to young people. Regulating UCIs' marketing can limit the power of those industries and is argued to be one of the most appropriate policy responses to such marketing. However, there is minimal consideration of how stakeholders view regulation of online advertising of HFSS products to young people. This UK-focused study addressed this through a secondary analysis of focus groups with young people (n = 15), the primary analysis of focus groups with parents (n = 8), and interviews with professional stakeholders (n = 11). The findings indicated that participants' views on the regulation of online advertising of HFSS products were informed by how professional stakeholders exerted instrumental, structural and discursive power. Participants cited regulation as a means to re-negotiate problematic power dynamics to increase young people's and parents' autonomy over young people's diets, yet concern remained as to the impact regulation may have on individual autonomy. To garner increased public support for such regulatory policies, it may be beneficial for advocates to emphasise the empowering elements of those regulatory policies. Advocacy actors may wish to shift their framing of regulation from one that focuses on restricting industry practices, to one that centres on empowering individuals.
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.