Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40581612›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of public health2025

Comparisons of Nutri-Score and NutrInform Battery on consumer preferences, objective understanding, and food choices among Portuguese consumers.

Théo Vasseur, Morgane Fialon, Pedro Marques-Vidal, Paula Pereira, Aline Meirhaeghe, Pilar Galan, Emmanuelle Kesse-Guyot, Mathilde Touvier, Mélanie Deschasaux-Tanguy, Barthélémy Sarda and 3 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

13 authors.

Théo VasseurCentre of Research in Epidemiology and StatisticS (CRESS), Nutritional Epidemiology Research Team (EREN), Université Sorbonne Paris Nord and Université Paris Cité, INSERM, INRAE, CNAM, Bobigny, France.
Morgane FialonCentre of Research in Epidemiology and StatisticS (CRESS), Nutritional Epidemiology Research Team (EREN), Université Sorbonne Paris Nord and Université Paris Cité, INSERM, INRAE, CNAM, Bobigny, France.ORCID 0000-0002-6576-0030
Pedro Marques-VidalDepartment of Medicine, Internal Medicine, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-4548-8500
Paula PereiraApplied Nutrition Research Group (GENA), Nutrition Lab, CIIEM-Egas Moniz School of Health & Science, Caparica, Portugal.
Aline MeirhaegheCentre of Research in Epidemiology and StatisticS (CRESS), Nutritional Epidemiology Research Team (EREN), Université Sorbonne Paris Nord and Université Paris Cité, INSERM, INRAE, CNAM, Bobigny, France.ORCID 0000-0001-6983-2364
Pilar GalanCentre of Research in Epidemiology and StatisticS (CRESS), Nutritional Epidemiology Research Team (EREN), Université Sorbonne Paris Nord and Université Paris Cité, INSERM, INRAE, CNAM, Bobigny, France.ORCID 0000-0003-1706-3107
Emmanuelle Kesse-GuyotCentre of Research in Epidemiology and StatisticS (CRESS), Nutritional Epidemiology Research Team (EREN), Université Sorbonne Paris Nord and Université Paris Cité, INSERM, INRAE, CNAM, Bobigny, France.
Mathilde TouvierCentre of Research in Epidemiology and StatisticS (CRESS), Nutritional Epidemiology Research Team (EREN), Université Sorbonne Paris Nord and Université Paris Cité, INSERM, INRAE, CNAM, Bobigny, France.ORCID 0000-0002-8322-8857
Mélanie Deschasaux-TanguyCentre of Research in Epidemiology and StatisticS (CRESS), Nutritional Epidemiology Research Team (EREN), Université Sorbonne Paris Nord and Université Paris Cité, INSERM, INRAE, CNAM, Bobigny, France.ORCID 0000-0002-3359-420X
Barthélémy SardaCentre of Research in Epidemiology and StatisticS (CRESS), Nutritional Epidemiology Research Team (EREN), Université Sorbonne Paris Nord and Université Paris Cité, INSERM, INRAE, CNAM, Bobigny, France.
Serge HercbergCentre of Research in Epidemiology and StatisticS (CRESS), Nutritional Epidemiology Research Team (EREN), Université Sorbonne Paris Nord and Université Paris Cité, INSERM, INRAE, CNAM, Bobigny, France.
Lydiane NabecCentre de Recherche Réseaux, Innovation, Territoire et Mondialisation (RITM), Université Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France.
Chantal JuliaCentre of Research in Epidemiology and StatisticS (CRESS), Nutritional Epidemiology Research Team (EREN), Université Sorbonne Paris Nord and Université Paris Cité, INSERM, INRAE, CNAM, Bobigny, France.ORCID 0000-0003-2006-5269

Funding

French National Cancer Institute PREV19-017Université Sorbonne Paris Nord
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Front-of-pack nutrition labels (FoPLs) are a cost-effective measure to inform consumers about the nutritional values of foods and to help them make healthier food choices at the point of purchase. This study compared the preference and performance-objective understanding and food choices-of Portuguese consumers for two FoPLs: Nutri-Score and NutrInform Battery. An experimental study was conducted in 2022 on a representative sample of 1014 Portuguese adults (mean age = 45.1 ± 13.8 years; 49% women). Participants were randomly allocated to either the Nutri-Score or the NutrInform Battery group and asked to complete an online questionnaire testing their objective understanding of the label and the effect on purchase intentions for three food categories as well as perceived helpfulness and perception of the FoPL. In terms of participants' ability to identify the most nutritionally favourable foods, Nutri-Score outperformed NutrInform Battery in all categories, with the highest performance observed for the identification of the three foods of higher nutritional value within the breakfast product category (OR = 27.8 [19.4-39.9], P < .0001). Overall, with Nutri-Score, participants were more likely to intend to purchase more nutritionally favourable products than with NutrInform Battery (OR ranging from 2.01 [1.50-2.68] for breakfast cereals to 14.6 [10.2-20.9] for added fats, P < .0001). In terms of preference, Nutri-Score was more appreciated, and perceived as easier to use, more reliable, and more informative than NutrInform Battery. The Nutri-Score appeared to be a more appreciated and effective tool than NutrInform Battery for helping Portuguese consumers to choose foods with a better nutritional composition.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorConsumer BehaviorFood LabelingFood PreferencesNutritive ValueAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPortugalSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID40581612
PMCPMC12311349

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.