Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37280640›Full record

Observational studyBMC public health2023

Kilocalorie labelling in the out-of-home sector: an observational study of business practices and consumer behaviour prior to implementation of the mandatory calorie labelling policy in England, 2022.

Megan Polden, Andrew Jones, Jean Adams, Tom Bishop, Thomas Burgoine, Michael Essman, Stephen J Sharp, Richard Smith, Martin White, Eric Robinson

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

10 authors.

Megan PoldenDepartment of Primary Care & Mental Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. m.polden@liverpool.ac.uk.
Andrew JonesLiverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK.
Jean AdamsMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Tom BishopMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Thomas BurgoineMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Michael EssmanMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Stephen J SharpMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Richard SmithCollege of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Martin WhiteMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Eric RobinsonDepartment of Psychology, University of Liverpool, Eleanor Rathbone Building, Bedford Street South, Liverpool, L69 7ZA, UK.

Funding

Department of Health NIHR200689Medical Research Council MC/UU/00006/7Medical Research Council MC_UU_00006/7
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRegulations mandating kilocalorie (kcal) labelling for large businesses in the out-of-home food sector (OHFS) came into force on 6th April 2022 as a policy to reduce obesity in England. To provide indicators of potential reach and impact, kcal labelling practices were studied in the OHFS, and customer purchasing and consumption behaviours prior to implementation of the mandatory kcal labelling policy in England.

methodsFrom August-December 2021, large OHFS businesses subject to the kcal labelling regulations were visited prior to regulations coming into force on 6th April 2022. 3308 customers were recruited from 330 outlets and collected survey information on the number of kcal purchased and consumed by customers, customers' knowledge of the kcal content of their purchases, and customers noticing and use of kcal labelling. In a subset of 117 outlets, data was collected on nine recommended kcal labelling practices.

resultsThe average number of kcals purchased (1013 kcal, SD = 632 kcal) was high with 69% of purchases exceeding the recommendation of a maximum of 600 kcal per meal. Participants underestimated the energy content of their purchased meals by on average 253 kcal (SD = 644 kcals). In outlets providing kcal labelling in which customer survey data was collected, a minority of customers reported noticing (21%) or using (20%) kcal labelling. Out of the 117 outlets assessed for kcal labelling practices, 24 (21%) provided any in-store kcal labelling. None of the outlets met all nine aspects of recommended labelling practices.

conclusionsPrior to implementation of 2022 kcal labelling policy, the majority of sampled OHFS large business outlets in England did not provide kcal labelling. Few customers noticed or used the labels and on average customers purchased and consumed substantially more energy than recommended in public health guidelines. The findings suggest that reliance on voluntary action for kcal labelling implementation failed to produce widespread, consistent, and adequate kcal labelling practices.

Indexed as

Consumer BehaviorRestaurantsEnergy IntakeEnglandFood LabelingHumansMealsCalorie labelsEnergy labellingObesity policyOut-of-home food sector

Identifiers

PMID37280640
PMCPMC10242589

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.