Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35733102›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2022

"You can't just eat 16 teaspoons of sugar so why would you drink 16 teaspoons' worth of sugar?": a qualitative study of young adults' reactions to sugary drink warning labels.

C Miller, K Wright, J Dono, S Pettigrew, M Wakefield, J Coveney, G Wittert, D Roder, S Durkin, J Martin and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Primordial prevention: Reducing consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages in racial/ethnic populations.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

11 authors.

C MillerThe University of Adelaide's School of Public Health, Adelaide, Australia. Caroline.miller@sahmri.com.
K WrightHealth Policy Centre, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000, Australia.
J DonoHealth Policy Centre, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000, Australia.
S PettigrewFood Policy, The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
M WakefieldCentre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.
J CoveneyCollege of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia.
G WittertFreemasons Foundation Centre for Men's Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.
D RoderCancer Epidemiology and Population Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.
S DurkinCentre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.
J MartinObesity Policy Coalition and Alcohol and Obesity Policy, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.
K EttridgeHealth Policy Centre, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSeveral jurisdictions have introduced nutrient warning front of pack (FoP) labels in an effort to curb consumption of ultra-processed foods and beverages high in free sugars (sugars added to foods and beverages, and sugars naturally present in honey, syrups, fruit juices and fruit juice concentrates). This study aimed to explore consumer understanding and perceptions of FoP warning labels that convey different nutritional and health information messages regarding the consumption of sugary drinks.

methodsSixteen focus groups were held with 4-8 young adults per group (aged 18-24; n = 105 participants in total) stratified by education level, location (rural centres, large cities) and gender (males, females) to ensure diversity. Labels shown to participants during group discussions included text warning labels of health effects, exercise equivalents, calorie/kilojoule information and sugar content as a "high in" label and as teaspoons (text and pictograms). Thematic analysis was undertaken.

resultsFour themes were identified related to participants' perceived effectiveness of labels: the extent to which labels were perceived to be useful, relevant and credible; the extent to which a label elicited shock or disgust (perceived aversiveness); the extent to which the label message was resistant to self-exemption; and participants' perceived potential of the label to reduce purchasing and consumption behaviour. Across all four themes, labels communicating the number of teaspoons of sugar in a sugary drink (whether by text or pictogram) were perceived as the most impactful, resistant to self-exemption and to have the greatest potential to reduce consumption, with enhanced reactions to the pictogram label. Labels depicting health effects, exercise equivalents, calorie/kilojoule information or a general 'high in sugar' warning were perceived by consumers to be less effective in one or more themes.

conclusionsLabels conveying the amount of sugar in a beverage in teaspoons were perceived as highly factual, relatable and interpretable, and as having the greatest potential to impact consumption attitudes and intentions. Further quantitative studies are required to compare the potential effectiveness of the teaspoons of sugar labels in reducing purchasing and consumption behaviour than other alternative warning labels, such as health effects or "high in" sugar labels.

Indexed as

Food LabelingSugar-Sweetened BeveragesBeveragesConsumer BehaviorFemaleHumansMaleSugarsYoung AdultSugarsConsumer perceptionsQualitativeSugary drinksWarning labelsYoung adults

Identifiers

PMID35733102
PMCPMC9219237

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.