ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2025
Brazilian front-of-package nutrition labeling: consumer perceptions on social media platform X.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to analyze how the Brazilian front-of-package nutrition labeling (FOPNL) policy has been represented and discussed on the social media platform X (formerly Twitter). Methods: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted based on 2,323 posts published by personal user accounts on X between October 2020 and April 2024. All posts were written in Portuguese and contained terms related to Brazilian FOPNL. The posts analysis comprised: (i) publication type (science, information, opinion, regulation), (ii) positioning on FOPNL (positive, moderately positive, neutral, moderately negative, negative), and (iii) thematic content, based on eight thematic categories: nutrients of concern, health risk, regulatory aspects, no effect, support for the regulation, critiques and concerns, decision-making and others. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the distribution of posts over time and the relationship between thematic categories and positions on FOPNL. Results: The number of posts increased progressively over the study period. The most prevalent thematic categories were nutrients of concern (92.0% CI 95% 90.86-93.07), critiques and concerns (31.2% CI 95% 29.40-33.17) and no effect (29.8% CI 95% 28.00-31.73). Favorable perceptions on FOPNL were noted, particularly in posts supporting the regulation (67.36%), whereas negative positions were more commonly found in the "critiques and concerns" category (91.36%). Thematic analysis revealed a variety of user reactions, including expressions of surprise, discomfort, or dissatisfaction, often conveyed through ironic or sarcastic tones. Conclusion: The implementation of FOPNL in Brazil was accompanied by increasing public engagement over time. It was possible to understand consumers' positions and sentiments related to FOPNL through the posts analysis on social media platform X, ranging from positive to negative. These findings highlight the importance of monitoring not only regulatory compliance but also public attitudes toward health policies, as a strategy to inform policy refinement, strengthen public trust, and enhance the impact of nutrition labeling initiatives.
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.