Trial reportAmerican journal of preventive medicine2023
Consumer Reactions to Positive and Negative Front-of-Package Food Labels.
Trial report in American journal of preventive medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Environmental Menu Labels and Food Selection Among US Adults: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2026Trial
- Food Compass Score vs FDA Healthy Labeling and Consumer Purchases: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2025Trial
- Nutrition Info and Other Front-of-Package Labels and Simulated Food and Beverage Purchases: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2025Trial
- Ecolabels and the Healthfulness and Carbon Footprint of Restaurant Meal Selections: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2025Trial
- Comparison of Sales From Vending Machines With 4 Different Food and Beverage Messages: A Randomized Trial.JAMA network open · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Effects of 4 Interpretive Front-of-Package Labeling Systems on Hypothetical Beverage and Snack Selections: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2023Trial
- Perspective: What is the Likely Impact of the Proposed Food and Drug Administration Front-of-Package Criteria on the Labeling of Foods?Current developments in nutrition · 2026Article
- Translating nutrition science into national policy: comparative assessment of the 2025-2030 U. S. Dietary Guidelines and the Italian Mediterranean-based guidelines.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Indonesian Adolescents' Perceptions of Front-of-Package Labels on Packaged Food and Drinks.Current developments in nutrition · 2025Article
- Health Claims, Product Features and Instructions for Use on the Labels of Potassium-enriched Salt Products: A Content Analysis.Current developments in nutrition · 2024Article
- Potential consumer response to the healthy symbol proposed by the U.S. food and Drug Administration.Heliyon · 2024Article
- The Nutri-Score Scale-A Tool for Assessing the Nutritional Quality of Processed Meat Products Available on the Polish Market.Nutrients · 2024Article
- Importance of Nutrition Security to CVD Prevention Efforts in the USA.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe National Academy of Medicine recommends that the U.S. adopt an interpretative front-of-package food labeling system, but uncertainty remains about how this system should be designed. This study examined reactions to front-of-package food labeling systems that use positive labels to identify healthier foods, negative labels to identify unhealthier foods, or both.
methodsIn August 2021, U.S. adults (N=3,051) completed an online randomized experiment. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 labeling conditions: control (calorie), positive, negative, or both positive and negative labels. Labels were adapted from designs for a 'healthy' label drafted by the Food and Drug Administration and displayed on the front of product packaging. Participants selected products to purchase, identified healthier products, and reported reactions to the labels. Analyses, conducted in 2022, examined the healthfulness of participants' selections using the Ofcom Nutrient Profiling Model score (0-100, higher scores indicate being healthier).
resultsParticipants exposed to only positive labels, only negative labels, or both positive and negative labels had healthier selections than participants in the control arm (differences vs control=1.13 [2%], 2.34 [4%] vs 3.19 [5%], respectively; all p<0.01). The both-positive-and-negative-labels arm outperformed the only-negative-labels (p=0.03) and only-positive-labels (p<0.001) arms. The only-negative-labels arm outperformed the only-positive-labels arm (p=0.005). All the 3 interpretative labeling systems also led to improvements in the identification of healthier products and beneficial psychological reactions (e.g., attention, thinking about health effects; all p<0.05).
conclusionsFront-of-package food labeling systems that use both positive and negative labels could encourage healthier purchases and improve understanding more than systems using only positive or only negative labels.
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.