ArticleBMJ public health2026
Views of people with disordered eating on current and alternative out-of-home calorie labelling policies in England: a mixed-methods survey.
Article in BMJ public health, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Out-of-home calorie labelling was introduced in England as part of public health policy to address obesity. We examined the acceptability and perceived impacts of the policy on individuals with disordered eating. Additionally, potential alternative nutritional label policies were explored. We hypothesised that individuals with binge eating would view the policy more favourably compared with individuals without binge eating. Methods: A cross-sectional mixed-methods study was conducted from February 2024 to March 2025. Inclusion criteria were age ≥16 years, living in England and having experienced disordered eating. In total, 1001 people participated. Results: Latent profile analyses revealed five distinct groups of people based on policy acceptability, perceived impacts and avoidance of calorie labels: (1) highly negative with avoidance (n=202, 20.2%); (2) highly negative without avoidance (n=112, 11.2%); (3) moderately negative (n=183, 18.3%); (4) neutral (n=241, 24.1%) and (5) positive (n=263, 26.3%). Current binge eating was associated with lower likelihood of belonging in the Conclusions: People with disordered eating hold diverse opinions on out-of-home calorie labels. Our findings shed new light on which demographic groups are negatively or positively impacted by such labels and suggest that optional calories on menus would be the preferred policy choice of people with disordered eating.
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.