ArticlePloS one2024
Influence of the cautionary legend on non-nutritive sweetener (NNS) on preference and healthfulness perception.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In 2020, Mexico's Congress mandated front-of-package warning labels (FOPWL) and two cautionary legends; one of which for non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS) with a statement "Contains NNS. Avoid in children". The aim of the study was to assess the influence of the "excess in sugar" warning label (WL) and NNS cautionary legend on preference and healthfulness perception of fruit-based beverages among parents of 5-10 year-olds. Also, to test if parents' preferences and perceptions differed by nutrition knowledge and previous knowledge on NNS. Data from the EPHA niñ@s (Study of the Perception and Dietary Habits in Children, for its acronym in Spanish) cohort were analyzed (n = 844). Parents were asked to choose between 100% juice and nectar with added sugars above the cut-off point, and between the latter and nectar with NNS marketed as "light", and to rate how healthy they considered each product at two different timepoints. At time 1, products were shown without the FOPWL; at time 2, nectar with excess sugar had the "excess sugar" WL and nectar with NNS had the cautionary legend on NNS. General Linearized Models (GLM) were used to assess changes in preference and perceived healthiness. Interaction terms assessed the impact of nutrition knowledge and NNS awareness. The study found that FOPWL significantly shifted parental preferences towards 100% juice over nectar with "excess sugar" (15.4% increase, p<0.001), and the latter over nectar with NNS (21.8% increase, p<0.001). Similarly, the FOPWL decreased the perceived healthiness of both nectar with "excess sugars" and nectar with NNS. The effect of labels on healthfulness perception was strongest among parents with low to medium nutrition knowledge and no prior knowledge of NNS. The inclusion of FOPWL seems to aid parents in making better-informed decisions regarding the nutritional quality of beverages for their children.
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.