Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42157575›Full record

SynthesisObesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity2026

The Impact of Front-of-Pack Labeling on Social Inequality in Sugar Consumption and Purchase: A Systematic Review.

Ziyao Ge, Claudia H Marck, Adyya Gupta, Gagandeep Kaur, Roisin McGrath, Ankur Singh

Abstract readSystematic ReviewReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. The Impact of Front-of-Pack Labeling on Social Inequality in Sugar Consumption and Purchase: A Systematic Review.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2026
    Pooled it
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

6 authors.

Ziyao GeCentre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-0067-975X
Claudia H MarckDisability and Health Unit, Centre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3173-1522
Adyya GuptaDeakin Centre for Global Preventive Health and Nutrition, Deakin Institute for Health Transformation, School of Health and Social Development, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3900-9849
Gagandeep KaurCentre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9226-1707
Roisin McGrathMelbourne Dental School, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7588-5235
Ankur SinghUniversity of Sydney School of Dentistry, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1336-6493

Funding

China Scholarship Council-University of Melbourne PhD 202308240005
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis systematic review examined the impact of front-of-pack labeling (FOPL) on social inequality in sugar consumption and purchase.

methodsWe searched Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, and Web of Science for studies published in English since 2005. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials and observational studies. The screening was conducted independently by at least two reviewers. Data extraction and quality assessments were cross-checked. The risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-E, RoB2, and CHEERS 2022. A narrative synthesis summarized the findings.

resultsOf the total of 7701 studies identified, 10 studies were included. All included studies were conducted in high- and upper-middle-income countries, and primarily evaluated one specific type of FOPL, specifically warning labels (n = 8). All studies reported FOPL reduced sugar consumption at the population level. However, findings on social inequality were inconsistent. Five studies showed greater benefit among higher-socioeconomic groups, four among lower-socioeconomic groups, two identified a U-shaped effect, and two found no differential effect by socioeconomic status. The overall quality of studies was poor. DISCUSSION: FOPL, in particular warning labels, can reduce sugar consumption, but its effects on socioeconomic inequalities were inconsistent. Evaluation of high-quality longitudinal research is needed to ensure FOPL interventions are inclusive and effective across socioeconomic groups.

Indexed as

Consumer BehaviorDietary SugarsFood LabelingHumansSocioeconomic Disparities in HealthSocioeconomic FactorsDietary Sugarsfront‐of‐pack labelingsocial inequalitysugar consumptionsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID42157575
PMCPMC13655994

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.