Trial reportAmerican journal of preventive medicine2023
Natural Claims on Sugary Fruit Drinks: A Randomized Experiment With U.S. Parents.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating text, icon, and graphic nutrition labels: An eye tracking experiment with Latino adults in the US.Appetite · 2025Article
- Characterising Parent-Appeal Marketing on Foods for Children: A Scoping Review.Current nutrition reports · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionNatural claims on food are largely unregulated in the U.S. This study examined the effects of natural claims on a fruit-flavored drink with added sugar (i.e., fruit drink).
methodsIn 2019, U.S. parents of children aged 2-12 years (N=1,078) recruited from an online survey panel were randomized to one of three arms: natural claim on a fruit drink, 100% all-natural claim, or a no-claim control. Parents reported their intentions and perceptions regarding fruit drinks using 1-5 response scales. Analysis occurred in 2022-2023.
resultsBoth natural claims led parents to have higher intentions to purchase a fruit drink for their child than the control (average differential effect=0.20-0.24, both p<0.05). The natural claim (but not the 100% all-natural claim) also led parents to think that the fruit drink was healthier for their children (average differential effect=0.22, p=0.024). Claims made parents less likely to think that the drink contained added sugar (average differential effect= -0.08 to -0.12, both p<0.05) and led to lower estimated amounts of added sugar in teaspoons (average differential effect= -1.77 to -2.09, both p<0.05). Mediation analyses revealed that the claims led to higher intentions to purchase the fruit drink by increasing perceived healthfulness of the fruit drink and by leading parents to believe that there was no added sugar in the fruit drink.
conclusionsNatural claims could increase interest in and perceived healthfulness of fruit drinks. Misperceptions about the nutritional content caused by claims appear to be driving greater purchase intentions. These findings suggest a need for stronger regulation around natural claims to prevent consumer misunderstanding.
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.