Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37507841›Full record

ArticleThe International journal of eating disorders2023

Acceptability and perceived harm of calorie labeling and other obesity policies: A cross-sectional survey study of UK adults with eating disorders and other mental health conditions.

I Gusti Ngurah Edi Putra, Megan Polden, Lettie Wareing, Eric Robinson

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The International journal of eating disorders, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Does menu calorie labelling cause or exacerbate eating disorders?International journal of obesity (2005) · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

I Gusti Ngurah Edi PutraDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1014-6949
Megan PoldenDepartment of Primary Care and Mental Health, Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1813-0765
Lettie WareingDepartment of Psychology, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1825-4626
Eric RobinsonDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3586-5533
University of Liverpool · GBLancaster University · GB

Funding

Economic and Social Research Council ES/P000665/1Economic and Social Research Council ES/V017594/1Faculty of Health and Life Sciences (HLS) Support Policy Fund, University of Liverpool, UKH2020 European Research Council PIDS, 803194NIHR Applied Research Collaboration ARC NWC and Alzheimer's Society
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe assessed perceptions of recently proposed UK obesity policies (mandatory calorie labeling, banning of advertisements of unhealthy food and drinks online and before 9 pm on TV, and banning "buy one get one free" deals for unhealthy food and drinks) in people with an eating disorder (ED) and other mental health conditions.

methodA total of 1273 participants with a self-reported lifetime mental health condition (N = 583 with an ED) completed an online survey in September-November 2022. Multinomial logistic regression was used to examine support for and potential adverse effects of policies in participants with and without an ED. A qualitative analysis of the potential effects of the policy on current ED symptoms was also conducted to better understand how and why policies may be damaging or beneficial.

resultsParticipants with an ED had a lower level of support for the implementation of the calorie labeling policy compared to those without an ED (43% vs. 58%). Half of the participants with an ED (55%) reported that labeling may worsen their ED symptoms. Qualitative data indicated perceived potential harm (e.g., a gateway to relapse, negative effects on mood) and perceived benefits (e.g., feeling informed and reassured) of calorie labeling in participants with an ED. No differences in support or perceived harms of the other two policies were observed between participants with versus without an ED. DISCUSSION: Future studies are warranted to explore the potential effects of calorie labeling and how to mitigate negative impacts on people with an ED. PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE: This research is the first to assess the perceptions of UK obesity-related policies in people with an ED and other mental health conditions. Participants with an ED (vs. without) were more likely to disagree with the government implementing the calorie labeling policy. These findings highlight the potentially harmful effects of calorie labeling in people with an ED and the need for future research to understand how to mitigate negative impacts.

Indexed as

Feeding and Eating DisordersObesity, MorbidAdultCross-Sectional StudiesEnergy IntakeHumansMental HealthObesityPolicyUnited Kingdomcalorie informationeating disordersmental healthobesity policypublic health policy

Identifiers

PMID37507841
PMCPMC10947290
OpenAlexW4385377588

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.