ArticlePublic health nutrition2026
Consumer understanding, preferences and acceptance of front-of-pack labels in Thailand: foundational evidence for policy development.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to assess the understanding, perceptions and preferences of different front-of-pack labelling (FOPL) formats among Thai consumers.
designWe conducted a mixed-methods study comprising a cross-sectional online survey and semi-structured interviews between February and March 2022. The survey assessed comprehension and preferences for six FOPL formats (Guideline Daily Amounts (GDA), Healthier Choice logo (HCL), warning labels (WLs), Nutri-Score, Health Star Rating and Traffic Light labels). Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics, chi-square tests and multiple logistic regression. Qualitative data underwent thematic analysis.
settingBangkok and metropolitan areas.
participantsThai residents aged 12-78 years (
resultsWhile awareness of existing labels was high (GDA: 95·4 %, HCL: 82·4 %), only 23·9 % regularly read GDA labels. WLs and Nutri-Score were the most effective at providing information to consumers in a format that translated into choosing healthier products. WLs demonstrated the highest effectiveness in guiding healthier choices. HCL received the highest agreement across multiple attributes, including packaging inclusion preference (59·8 %), visibility (58·5 %) and visual appeal (57·3 %), although effectiveness was not tested. Qualitative findings revealed preferences for colour-coded systems but identified barriers including time constraints, small font sizes and difficulty interpreting numerical information.
conclusionsWhile interpretive labels, particularly WLs, are most effective for guiding consumers to healthier choices, successful implementation requires consideration of both consumer preferences and real-world usage constraints. Findings support replacing the current GDA system with an interpretive design, accompanied by comprehensive public education campaigns. These results provide evidence-based recommendations for FOPL policy development in Thailand.
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.