ArticlePublic health nutrition2023
Effects of a front-of-package disclosure on accuracy in assessing children's drink ingredients: two randomised controlled experiments with US caregivers of young children.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Relationship Between Fruit Drink Front-of-Package Claims, Fruit Imagery, and Ingredient Disclosures and Consumer Perceptions, Intentions, and Behavior: A Systematic Review.Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluating text, icon, and graphic nutrition labels: An eye tracking experiment with Latino adults in the US.Appetite · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTest effects of a standardised front-of-package (FOP) disclosure statement (indicating added sugar, non-nutritive sweetener (NNS) and juice content) on accuracy in assessing ingredients and perceived healthfulness of children's drinks.
designIn two randomised controlled experiments, the same participants viewed drink packages and indicated if products contained added sugar or NNS and percent juice and rated drink healthfulness. Experiment 1 (E1) included novel (non-US) children's drinks with a) product claims only (control), b) claims and disclosure, or c) disclosure only. Experiment 2 (E2) included existing children's drinks (with claims) with a) no disclosure (control) or b) disclosure. Both experiments evaluated sweetened (fruit drink and flavoured water) and unsweetened (100 % juice and juice/water blend) drinks. Potential individual differences (education level and race/ethnicity) in effects were explored.
settingOnline survey.
participantsSix hundred and forty-eight US caregivers of young children (1-5 years).
resultsFOP disclosures significantly increased accuracy for most ingredients and drink types, including identifying presence or absence of NNS in sweetened drinks, no added sugar in juice/water blends, and actual percent juice in fruit drinks and juice/water blends in both experiments. Disclosures also increased recognition that the novel 100 % juice and juice/water blend did not contain NNS or added sugar (E1) and existing sweetened drinks contained added sugar (E2). Disclosures reduced perceived healthfulness of sweetened drinks but did not increase unsweetened drink healthfulness ratings. Some differences by participant socio-demographic characteristics require additional research.
conclusionsFOP disclosures on children's drink packages can increase caregivers' understanding of product ingredients and aid in selecting healthier children's drinks.
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.