ArticlePloS one2026
Applying Brazilian front-of-pack nutrition labeling and PAHO nutritional criteria to digital food advertising: regulatory implications for protecting children and adolescents.
Article in PloS one, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Front-of-pack nutrition labeling (FoPNL) and restrictions on food advertising are regulatory strategies to support informed dietary choices and reduce exposure to unhealthy food. These measures are often integrated through a policy package, that employs a Nutrient Profile Model (NPM) for the classification of food. In Brazil, however, these policies remain fragmented, and current food advertising regulations do not fully cover all channels, particularly digital media. This study applied the NPM adopted in Brazil's FoPNL (RDC No. 429/2020 in conjunction with IN No. 75/2020, hereafter RDC 429) and those proposed by the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) for identifying foods subject to advertising restrictions on social media posts directed at children and adolescents. The sample included posts from ultra-processed food brands/products on Instagram (n = 623), TikTok (n = 257), and YouTube (n = 114). Both NPM were applied to assess non-compliance at the food-item level and at the advertisement level (considering posts containing at least one non-compliant food). At the food-item level, 61.28% of products exceeded at least one item of RDC 429, with the highest prevalence on TikTok (72.63%), while 93.86% were non-compliant according to PAHO, reaching 100% on TikTok and 98.5% on YouTube. At the advertisement level, 49.53% of posts contained at least one non-compliant food under RDC 429, and 74.13% under PAHO, with YouTube showing the greatest potential for restriction (62.16% RDC; 99.10% PAHO). Both models are feasible for regulating digital food advertising: the PAHO provides a robust framework, while RDC 429 offers a strategic starting point given its current implementation in Brazil.
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.