Trial reportPublic health nutrition2026
The impact of restricting price promotions on foods high in fat, sugar and salt on purchasing behaviours: a randomised controlled trial in a simulated online supermarket in the UK.
Trial report 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePrice promotions influence food choices and are disproportionately applied to foods high in fat, sugar and salt (HFSS), consumption of which is a known contributor to poor diet and diet-related non-communicable diseases. This study evaluates the effectiveness of (1) restricting price promotions of HFSS products and (2) allowing such promotions but restricting communications regarding them in changing purchasing behaviours.
designBetween-subjects randomised controlled trial with three arms: (1) reduced price, labelled a price promotion ('Usual Practice'); (2) reduced price, not labelled a price promotion ('No Communication') and (3) standard price ('No Promotion'). Participants selected food and drinks for 2 d in a one-off shop, without restrictions on the number of items to purchase or the budget, at a simulated online supermarket. We measured total energy (kcal) in basket, total cost, total number of items, energy density (kcal/100 g) and proportion of the basket that was HFSS.
settingSimulated online supermarket.
participantsAdults representative of the UK population (
resultsThere were no significant differences in energy in baskets between groups, after controlling for age, sex, household income, ethnicity and deprivation. No significant differences were found between groups' baskets for total cost, energy density or proportion HFSS. Participants in the 'Usual Practice' group selected significantly more items than the 'No Promotion' group (11·4
conclusionsNo significant effects of restricting price promotions, or communications of them, were found for purchasing behaviours in a simulated online supermarket. Further price-based interventions, especially in real-world settings, are needed to provide robust policy recommendations.
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.