Dataset Information

Socioeconomic status, energy cost, and nutrient content of supermarket food purchases.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The relative affordability of energy-dense versus nutrient-rich foods may promote socioeconomic disparities in dietary quality and obesity. Although supermarkets are the largest food source in the American diet, the associations between SES and the cost and nutrient content of freely chosen food purchases have not been described.

Purpose

To investigate relationships of SES with the energy cost ($/1000 kcal) and nutrient content of freely chosen supermarket purchases.

Methods

Supermarket shoppers (n=69) were recruited at a Phoenix AZ supermarket in 2009. The energy cost and nutrient content of participants' purchases were calculated from photographs of food packaging and nutrition labels using dietary analysis software. Data were analyzed in 2010-2011.

Results

Two SES indicators, education and household income as a percentage of the federal poverty guideline (FPG), were associated with the energy cost of purchased foods. Adjusting for covariates, the amount spent on 1000 kcal of food was $0.26 greater for every multiple of the FPG, and those with a baccalaureate or postbaccalaureate degree spent an additional $1.05 for every 1000 kcal of food compared to those with no college education. Lower energy cost was associated with higher total fat and less protein, dietary fiber, and vegetables per 1000 kcal purchased.

Conclusions

Low-SES supermarket shoppers purchase calories in inexpensive forms that are higher in fat and less nutrient-rich.

SUBMITTER: Appelhans BM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3858078 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Socioeconomic status, energy cost, and nutrient content of supermarket food purchases.

Appelhans Bradley M BM Milliron Brandy-Joe BJ Woolf Kathleen K Johnson Tricia J TJ Pagoto Sherry L SL Schneider Kristin L KL Whited Matthew C MC Ventrelle Jennifer C JC

American journal of preventive medicine 20120401 4

<h4>Background</h4>The relative affordability of energy-dense versus nutrient-rich foods may promote socioeconomic disparities in dietary quality and obesity. Although supermarkets are the largest food source in the American diet, the associations between SES and the cost and nutrient content of freely chosen food purchases have not been described.<h4>Purpose</h4>To investigate relationships of SES with the energy cost ($/1000 kcal) and nutrient content of freely chosen supermarket purchases.<h4 ...[more]

PMID: 22424253

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Snacking raises concern since it may lead to an additional energy intake and poor nutrient quality. A snacking occasion can be defined as any eating occasion apart from main meals, regardless of the amount or type of foods consumed. We described the frequency of snacking occasions according to daily timing in French adults, and compared them between each other, and with the main meals, in terms of energy intake, energy and nutrient density, and food content. METHODS:This cross-sectional analysis included 104,265 adults from the NutriNet-Santé cohort. Food intake was estimated using 24-h records of weekdays. For each eating occasion, nutrient density and energy content and density were computed. RESULTS:After weighting, 47.6% of our sample were men and mean age was 45.6 (15.3). Overall, 68% of participants ate at least one snack during the reported record, mainly in the morning or afternoon. Overall snack had a lower nutrient density [22.8 (SD?=?278.3)] than main meals [25.8 (36.9) to 30.0 (30.4)]; but higher energy density [222.2 (163.3) kcal/100 g] than meals [133.9 (57.3) to 175.9 (99.6) kcal/100 g]. Morning snack was the snacking occasion with the lowest energy density [211 kcal/100 g], the lowest energy intake [104.1 kcal] and the highest nutrient density [60.1]. Afternoon and evening snacks had the highest energy loads [192.4 kcal and 207.6 kcal], but low nutrient scores [16 and 13, respectively]. The main food groups contributing to energy intake from snacks were fatty-sweet and sugary foods, fruit, hot beverages, and bread. CONCLUSIONS:Our findings highlight the frequency of snacking and the varying nutritional quality of snacks over the day. The morning snack was shown to be healthier than afternoon and evening snacks. TRIAL REGISTRATION:This study was conducted according to guidelines laid down in the Declaration of Helsinki, and all procedures were approved by the Institutional Review Board of the French Institute for Health and Medical Research (IRB Inserm No. 0000388FWA00005831) and the French Data Protection Authority (Commission Nationale Informatique et Libertés No. 908450 and No. 909216). Electronic informed consent was obtained from all participants (Clinical Trial no. NCT03335644 ).

Project description:BackgroundAdults with a low socioeconomic position (SEP) are more likely to engage in unhealthy diets as compared to adults with high SEP. However, individual-level educational interventions aiming to improve food choices have shown limited effectiveness in adults with low SEP. Environmental-level interventions such as nudging strategies however, may be more likely to benefit low SEP groups. We aimed to review the evidence for the effectiveness of nudges as classified according to interventions in proximal physical micro-environments typology (TIPPME) to promote healthy purchases, food choice, or affecting energy intake or content of purchases, within real-life food purchasing environments. Second, we aimed to investigate the potentially moderating role of SEP.MethodsWe systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, and PsycINFO until 31 January 2018. Studies were considered eligible for inclusion when they i) complied with TIPPME intervention definitions; ii) studied actual purchases, food choice, or energy intake or content of purchases, iii) and were situated in real-life food purchasing environments. Risk of bias was assessed using a quality assessment tool and evidence was synthesized using harvest plots.ResultsFrom the 9210 references identified, 75 studies were included. Studies were generally of weak to moderate quality. The most frequently studied nudges were information (56%), mixed (24%), and position nudges (13%). Harvest plots showed modest tendencies towards beneficial effects on outcomes for information and position nudges. Less evidence was available for other TIPPME nudging interventions for which the harvest plots did not show compelling patterns. Only six studies evaluated the effects of nudges across levels of SEP (e.g., educational level, food security status, job type). Although there were some indications that nudges were more effective in low SEP groups, the limited amount of evidence and different proxies of SEP used warrant caution in the interpretation of findings.ConclusionsInformation and position nudges may contribute to improving population dietary behaviours. Evidence investigating the moderating role of SEP was limited, although some studies reported greater effects in low SEP subgroups. We conclude that more high-quality studies obtaining detailed data on participant's SEP are needed.RegistrationThis systematic review is registered in the PROSPERO database ( CRD42018086983 ).

Project description:BACKGROUND:In response to public concerns and campaigns, some United Kingdom supermarkets have implemented policies to reduce less-healthy food at checkouts. We explored the effects of these policies on purchases of less-healthy foods commonly displayed at checkouts. METHODS AND FINDINGS:We used a natural experimental design and two data sources providing complementary and unique information. We analysed data on purchases of small packages of common, less-healthy, checkout foods (sugary confectionary, chocolate, and potato crisps) from 2013 to 2017 from nine UK supermarkets (Aldi, Asda, Co-op, Lidl, M&S, Morrisons, Sainsbury's, Tesco, and Waitrose). Six supermarkets implemented a checkout food policy between 2013 and 2017 and were considered intervention stores; the remainder were comparators. Firstly, we studied the longitudinal association between implementation of checkout policies and purchases taken home. We used data from a large (n ? 30,000) household purchase panel of food brought home to conduct controlled interrupted time series analyses of purchases of less-healthy common checkout foods from 12 months before to 12 months after implementation. We conducted separate analyses for each intervention supermarket, using others as comparators. We synthesised results across supermarkets using random effects meta-analyses. Implementation of a checkout food policy was associated with an immediate reduction in four-weekly purchases of common checkout foods of 157,000 (72,700-242,800) packages per percentage market share-equivalent to a 17.3% reduction. This decrease was sustained at 1 year with 185,100 (121,700-248,500) fewer packages purchased per 4 weeks per percentage market share-equivalent to a 15.5% reduction. The immediate, but not sustained, effect was robust to sensitivity analysis. Secondly, we studied the cross-sectional association between checkout food policies and purchases eaten without being taken home. We used data from a smaller (n ? 7,500) individual purchase panel of food bought and eaten 'on the go'. We conducted cross-sectional analyses comparing purchases of common checkout foods in 2016-2017 from supermarkets with and without checkout food policies. There were 76.4% (95% confidence interval 48.6%-89.1%) fewer annual purchases of less-healthy common checkout foods from supermarkets with versus without checkout food policies. The main limitations of the study are that we do not know where in the store purchases were selected and cannot determine the effect of changes in purchases on consumption. Other interventions may also have been responsible for the results seen. CONCLUSIONS:There is a potential impact of checkout food polices on purchases. Voluntary supermarket-led activities may have public health benefits.

Project description:BackgroundFood purchasing is considered a key mediator between the food environment and eating behavior, and food purchasing patterns are increasingly measured in epidemiologic and intervention studies. However, the extent to which food purchases actually reflect individuals' dietary intake has not been rigorously tested. This study examined cross-sectional agreement between estimates of diet quality and nutrient densities derived from objectively documented household food purchases and those derived from interviewer-administered 24-h diet recalls. A secondary aim was to identify moderator variables associated with attenuated agreement between purchases and dietary intake.MethodsPrimary household food shoppers (N = 196) collected and annotated receipts for all household food and beverage purchases (16,356 total) over 14 days. Research staff visited participants' homes four times to photograph the packaging and nutrition labels of each purchased item. Three or four multiple-pass 24-h diet recalls were performed within the same 14-d period. Nutrient densities and Healthy Eating Index-2010 (HEI-2010) scores were calculated from both food purchase and diet recall data.ResultsHEI-2010 scores derived from food purchases (median = 60.9, interquartile range 49.1-71.7) showed moderate agreement (ρc = .57, p < .0001) and minimal bias (-2.0) with HEI-2010 scores from 24-h recalls (median = 60.1, interquartile range 50.8-73.9). The degree of observed bias was unrelated to the number of food/beverage purchases reported or participant characteristics such as social desirability, household income, household size, and body mass. Concordance for individual nutrient densities from food purchases and 24-h diet recalls varied widely from ρc = .10 to .61, with the strongest associations observed for fiber (ρc = .61), whole fruit (ρc = .48), and vegetables (ρc = .39).ConclusionsObjectively documented household food purchases yield an unbiased and reasonably accurate estimate of overall diet quality as measured through 24-h diet recalls, but are generally less useful for characterizing dietary intake of specific nutrients. Thus, some degree of caution is warranted when interpreting food purchase data as a reflection of diet in epidemiological and clinical research. Future work should examine agreement between food purchases and nutritional biomarkers.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02073643 . Retrospectively registered.

Project description:BackgroundNudging is increasingly used to promote healthy food choices in supermarkets. Ordering groceries online is gaining in popularity and nudging seems efficacious there as well, but is never comprehensively tested in real-life. We evaluated the real-life effectiveness of nudging in an online supermarket on healthy food purchases.MethodsWe conducted a multi-arm, parallel-group, individually randomized controlled trial in an online supermarket. During 1 month, all customers were randomized to (1) control condition, (2) information nudges, (3) position nudges, and (4) information and position nudges combined. Allocation was concealed and customers were not blinded, but unaware of the intervention. Mean differences between the control condition and the intervention arms in the total percentage of healthy purchases were assessed with a linear mixed model. We tested for effect modification by area-level deprivation.ResultsBased on sales data from 11,775 shoppers, no overall significant effects were detected. Yet, effects were modified by area-level deprivation (pArm 2 < 0.001). Among shoppers from deprived areas, those allocated to information nudges purchased a 2.4% (95%CI 0.8, 4.0) higher percentage of healthy products compared to controls. No significant differences were observed for position (- 1.3%; 95%CI - 2.8, 0.3) and combined nudges (- 0.1%; 95%CI - 1.7, 1.5). Shoppers from non-deprived areas exposed to information nudges (- 1.6%; 95%CI - 3.2, - 0.1) and the combined nudges (- 2.1%; 95%CI - 3.6, - 0.6), but not position nudges (- 0.9%; 95%CI - 2.4, 0.7), purchased a lower percentage of healthy products.ConclusionInformation nudges in an online supermarket can increase healthy product purchases, but only for those living in deprived areas. The adverse effects found on purchasing behaviors for those from non-deprived areas call for further research. Further research should also focus on real-life effects of online healthy food nudging as part of a broader nutrition intervention strategy, and on the equitability of the online nudging intervention within populations.Trial registrationRetrospectively registered in the ISRCTN registry at May 21, 2021 ( ISRCTN10491616 ).

Dataset Information

Socioeconomic status, energy cost, and nutrient content of supermarket food purchases.

Background

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Socioeconomic status, energy cost, and nutrient content of supermarket food purchases.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets