Cargando…

Randomized trial evaluating the effectiveness of within versus across-category front-of-package lower-calorie labelling on food demand

BACKGROUND: Several front-of-pack (FOP) labels identify healthier options by comparing foods within product categories. Alternative approaches label healthier options by comparing across categories. Which approach is superior remains unknown. The objective of this study was to test the effect of a w...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Finkelstein, Eric Andrew, Ang, Felicia Jia Ler, Doble, Brett
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7068974/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32164634
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-8434-1
_version_ 1783505683969212416
author Finkelstein, Eric Andrew
Ang, Felicia Jia Ler
Doble, Brett
author_facet Finkelstein, Eric Andrew
Ang, Felicia Jia Ler
Doble, Brett
author_sort Finkelstein, Eric Andrew
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Several front-of-pack (FOP) labels identify healthier options by comparing foods within product categories. Alternative approaches label healthier options by comparing across categories. Which approach is superior remains unknown. The objective of this study was to test the effect of a within-category versus across-category FOP lower calorie label on 1) the percentage of labeled products purchased, 2) several measures of calories purchased (total, per dollar and per serving), and 3) total spending. We also tested the moderating effects of hunger and mood on purchasing patterns. METHODS: Using an online grocery store, we conducted a 3 × 3 crossover trial involving actual purchases with 146 participants randomly exposed to: 1) no labeling control; 2) within-category lower calorie labels, and; 3) across-category lower calorie labels. We labeled the 20% of products with the lowest calories per serving within or across categories. Purchases were compared using a fixed effects regression on first-differenced outcomes. RESULTS: Relative to the control condition, there was a 3 percentage point increase (p = 0.01) in labelled products purchased in the within-category arm and a non-significant decrease of 1 percentage point (p = 0.711) in the across-category arm. There was no significant difference in the proportion of labeled products purchased between the two labelling conditions. Neither strategy resulted in reductions in any measure of calories purchased or in total spending. When limited to beverages, there was a 398 cal reduction (p = 0.01) in the within-category arm and a 438 cal reduction (p < 0.01) in the across-category arm versus the control. Mood and hunger did not modify the effects for either strategy. CONCLUSIONS: Results provide evidence that both labelling strategies have the potential to influence food purchasing patterns. However, we cannot definitely state that one labelling approach is superior or even that an increase in the proportion of labelled products purchased will lead to a reduction in calories purchased. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The American Economic Association’s registry for randomized controlled trials, RCT ID: AEARCTR-0002325; Prospectively Registered October 06, 2017. In compliance with ICMJE policy, the trial was also registered on Clinicaltrials.gov, RCT ID: [NCT04165447]. Retrospectively Registered 11 November 2019.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7068974
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70689742020-03-18 Randomized trial evaluating the effectiveness of within versus across-category front-of-package lower-calorie labelling on food demand Finkelstein, Eric Andrew Ang, Felicia Jia Ler Doble, Brett BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: Several front-of-pack (FOP) labels identify healthier options by comparing foods within product categories. Alternative approaches label healthier options by comparing across categories. Which approach is superior remains unknown. The objective of this study was to test the effect of a within-category versus across-category FOP lower calorie label on 1) the percentage of labeled products purchased, 2) several measures of calories purchased (total, per dollar and per serving), and 3) total spending. We also tested the moderating effects of hunger and mood on purchasing patterns. METHODS: Using an online grocery store, we conducted a 3 × 3 crossover trial involving actual purchases with 146 participants randomly exposed to: 1) no labeling control; 2) within-category lower calorie labels, and; 3) across-category lower calorie labels. We labeled the 20% of products with the lowest calories per serving within or across categories. Purchases were compared using a fixed effects regression on first-differenced outcomes. RESULTS: Relative to the control condition, there was a 3 percentage point increase (p = 0.01) in labelled products purchased in the within-category arm and a non-significant decrease of 1 percentage point (p = 0.711) in the across-category arm. There was no significant difference in the proportion of labeled products purchased between the two labelling conditions. Neither strategy resulted in reductions in any measure of calories purchased or in total spending. When limited to beverages, there was a 398 cal reduction (p = 0.01) in the within-category arm and a 438 cal reduction (p < 0.01) in the across-category arm versus the control. Mood and hunger did not modify the effects for either strategy. CONCLUSIONS: Results provide evidence that both labelling strategies have the potential to influence food purchasing patterns. However, we cannot definitely state that one labelling approach is superior or even that an increase in the proportion of labelled products purchased will lead to a reduction in calories purchased. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The American Economic Association’s registry for randomized controlled trials, RCT ID: AEARCTR-0002325; Prospectively Registered October 06, 2017. In compliance with ICMJE policy, the trial was also registered on Clinicaltrials.gov, RCT ID: [NCT04165447]. Retrospectively Registered 11 November 2019. BioMed Central 2020-03-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7068974/ /pubmed/32164634 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-8434-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Finkelstein, Eric Andrew
Ang, Felicia Jia Ler
Doble, Brett
Randomized trial evaluating the effectiveness of within versus across-category front-of-package lower-calorie labelling on food demand
title Randomized trial evaluating the effectiveness of within versus across-category front-of-package lower-calorie labelling on food demand
title_full Randomized trial evaluating the effectiveness of within versus across-category front-of-package lower-calorie labelling on food demand
title_fullStr Randomized trial evaluating the effectiveness of within versus across-category front-of-package lower-calorie labelling on food demand
title_full_unstemmed Randomized trial evaluating the effectiveness of within versus across-category front-of-package lower-calorie labelling on food demand
title_short Randomized trial evaluating the effectiveness of within versus across-category front-of-package lower-calorie labelling on food demand
title_sort randomized trial evaluating the effectiveness of within versus across-category front-of-package lower-calorie labelling on food demand
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7068974/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32164634
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-8434-1
work_keys_str_mv AT finkelsteinericandrew randomizedtrialevaluatingtheeffectivenessofwithinversusacrosscategoryfrontofpackagelowercalorielabellingonfooddemand
AT angfeliciajialer randomizedtrialevaluatingtheeffectivenessofwithinversusacrosscategoryfrontofpackagelowercalorielabellingonfooddemand
AT doblebrett randomizedtrialevaluatingtheeffectivenessofwithinversusacrosscategoryfrontofpackagelowercalorielabellingonfooddemand