Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36006973›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2022

Exploring the effects of added sugar labels on food purchasing behaviour in Australian parents: An online randomised controlled trial.

Devorah Riesenberg, Anna Peeters, Kathryn Backholer, Jane Martin, Cliona Ni Mhurchu, Miranda R Blake

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. [Application of Digital Nutrition Technologies in Adult Weight Management].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2025
    Article
  4. 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

6 authors.

Devorah RiesenbergGlobal Obesity Centre, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
Anna PeetersGlobal Obesity Centre, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
Kathryn BackholerGlobal Obesity Centre, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
Jane MartinObesity Policy Coalition, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Cliona Ni MhurchuNational Institute for Health Innovation, School of Population Health, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Miranda R BlakeGlobal Obesity Centre, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0649-2320

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence of the effects of front-of-pack added sugar labelling remains limited, especially for foods other than sugary drinks. More information is needed about which labels are likely to be most effective in reducing intended purchases of products with higher added sugar content in realistic contexts to inform policymakers' decisions.

objectiveTo determine the impact of added sugar labels on intended purchases of high sugar breakfast cereals, yoghurt, and non-alcoholic beverages.

methodsAustralian parents who were regular purchasers of relevant product categories completed an online parallel randomised controlled trial from 31 August 2020 to 13 February 2021. Participants selected their intended purchase from 10 products in each of packaged beverages, breakfast cereal, and yoghurt categories after randomisation to one of seven added sugar labelling conditions in current use or under consideration by the Australian Government. Logistic regressions assessed differences between intervention and control conditions in the odds of intended purchases of a high sugar product.

results2825 eligible participants were randomised with 2582 valid surveys analysed (Control n = 367; 'Nutrition Information Panel (NIP) with Added Sugar' n = 364; 'Teaspoons of Sugar' n = 369; 'Warning' n = 371; 'Health Star Rating (HSR) using Total Sugar' n = 368; 'HSR with Added Sugar' n = 371; 'Sugar in the Ingredients List' n = 372). No consistent effects were found on intended purchases of high sugar products overall or within product categories for any of the tested labels compared to controls (overall, 'NIP with Added Sugar': OR 1.00 [95%CI 0.83,1.20]; 'Teaspoons of Sugar': 0.94[0.80,1.11]; 'Warning': 1.10[0.93,1.30]; 'HSR with Total Sugar': 1.01[0.85,1.21]; 'HSR with Added Sugar': 1.09[0.92,1.30]; 'Sugar in the Ingredients List': 1.01[0.85,1.21]).

conclusionsFindings reinforce the importance of ensuring nutrition labelling policies are introduced as part of a suite of interventions to influence both consumer and manufacturer behaviour.

trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12620000858998. Registered 28 August 2020, https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?ACTRN=12620000858998.

Indexed as

Consumer BehaviorSugarsAustraliaEdible GrainFood LabelingHumansParentsSugars

Identifiers

PMID36006973
PMCPMC9409597

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.