Dataset Information

Association of perception of front-of-pack labels with dietary, lifestyle and health characteristics.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To identify patterns of perception of front-of-pack (FOP) nutrition labels and determine dietary, lifestyle and health profiles related to such patterns.

Design

Cross-sectional.

Participants/setting

28,952 French adults participating in the web-based Nutrinet-Santé cohort.

Outcome measures

Perception was measured using indicators of understanding and acceptability for three simple FOP labels ("green tick", the logo of the French Nutrition and Health Program and "simple traffic lights" (STL)), and two detailed FOP formats ("multiple traffic lights" (MTL) and "color range" logo (CR)), placed on ready-to-eat soup packages. Dietary intake data were collected using three web-based 24 h records.

Statistical analyses

Associations of perception patterns with individual characteristics, including diet, lifestyle and health status, were examined using analysis of covariance and logistic regression, adjusted for socio-demographic and economic factors.

Results

No clear trend emerged concerning differences in dietary intake between perception groups. Low physical activity and obesity were more frequent in the 'favorable to STL' group (respectively, 20.7% and 10.7%). The 'favorable to MTL' group included the highest percentage of individuals who declared type 2 diabetes (2.2%). Persons with hypertension were proportionally more numerous in the 'favorable to MTL' and the 'favorable to CR logo' groups (respectively, 9.5% and 9.3%).

Conclusions

After adjustment for socio-demographic and economic factors, no FOP label stood out as being more suitable than another for reaching populations with poor diet. However, both STL and MTL may be most appropriate for increasing awareness of healthy eating among groups at higher risk of nutrition-related chronic diseases.

SUBMITTER: Mejean C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3951292 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Association of perception of front-of-pack labels with dietary, lifestyle and health characteristics.

Méjean Caroline C Macouillard Pauline P Péneau Sandrine S Lassale Camille C Hercberg Serge S Castetbon Katia K

PloS one 20140312 3

<h4>Objective</h4>To identify patterns of perception of front-of-pack (FOP) nutrition labels and determine dietary, lifestyle and health profiles related to such patterns.<h4>Design</h4>Cross-sectional.<h4>Participants/setting</h4>28,952 French adults participating in the web-based Nutrinet-Santé cohort.<h4>Outcome measures</h4>Perception was measured using indicators of understanding and acceptability for three simple FOP labels ("green tick", the logo of the French Nutrition and Health Program ...[more]

PMID: 24621617

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Four formats for a front-of-pack (FOP) nutrition label are currently considered in France: the Nutriscore (or 5-Colour Nutrition Label, developed by a public research team), the SENS (supported by retailers), Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL, currently used in UK) and a modified version of the Reference Intakes (mRIs, supported by industry). Our objective was to investigate the perception of these FOP labels, according to sociodemographic, lifestyle and dietary factors. DESIGN:Cross-sectional study. SETTING:Web-based French cohort. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE:FOP labels perception. PARTICIPANTS:Participants in the NutriNet-Santé cohort received a specific questionnaire on the perceptions of the four label formats identified. Sociodemographic, lifestyle and dietary data (three 24-hours dietary records) were collected through self-administered questionnaires. Mutually exclusive clusters of FOP labels perception were identified through a multiple correspondence analysis followed by a hierarchical clustering procedure. Sociodemographic, lifestyle and dietary factors associated with the clusters were explored using multivariable multinomial logistic regression. All analyses were weighted according to 2009 French census data. RESULTS:Among the 21,702 participants in the study, the Nutriscore received the most important number of favourable responses on positive perception dimensions by participants, followed by MTL and SENS. The five identified clusters were characterised by marked preferences for Nutriscore (cluster 1, 43.2% of participants, crude n=9,399), MTL (cluster 2, 27.3%, crude n=6,163), SENS (cluster 3, 17.05%, crude n=3,546), mRIs (cluster 4, 7.31%, crude n=1,632) and none of the presented formats (cluster 5, 5.10%, crude n=965). The cluster 1 (Nutriscore) was associated with lower adherence to nutritional recommendations, while cluster 2 (MTL) was associated with younger age and higher level of education. CONCLUSION:The Nutriscore appears to have a wide reach in the population and to appeal to subjects with lower adherence to nutritional recommendations.

Project description:Front-of-pack labeling is a cost-effective strategy to decrease population consumption of sodium, sugar, saturated fat, total fat, and trans-fatty acids, considered critical nutrients for chronic disease. Our main objective was to explore the subjective understanding of labels that are currently used internationally among low- and middle-income Mexican consumers. We performed two phases of 10 focus groups with adolescents (13-15 y), young adults (21-23 y), mothers of children 3-12 y, fathers of children 3-12 y and older adults (55-70 y). Seven FOPL were evaluated: Guideline Daily Amounts, Multiple Traffic Light, Chilean Warning labels, Warning labels in Red, 5-Color Nutrition Label, Health Star Rating, and Healthy Choice label. Data was analyzed with a triangulation of researchers using a content analysis, based on three codes: 1) awareness and use of the Guideline Daily Amounts, 2) acceptability, and 3) subjective understanding of labels. Most participants were aware of the Guideline Daily Amounts, however they rarely used it because interpreting the information displayed on the label was too complicated. Health Star Rating, Warning labels, Multiple Traffic Light and the Healthy Choice logo labels were the most understandable, however the acceptability of the The Healthy Choice logo decreased as it did not provide information on specific ingredients. The Warning labels was the only label able to warn about critical nutrients that could represent a health risk. The Warning labels in red was more accepted compared to Warning labels in black. Results show that directive and semi-directive labels, such as Warning labels, Health Star Rating or Multiple Traffic Light, may be better at helping population of low- and middle income make healthier food choices, than non-directive FOPL such as the Guideline Daily Amounts implemented in México. The study results highlight the potential of Warning labels to support decreases in the consumption of critical ingredients in low- and middle-income Mexican consumers.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Front-of-package labelling is a cost-effective strategy to help consumers make healthier choices and informed food purchases. The effect of labels is mediated by consumer understanding and acceptability of the label. We compared the acceptability and understanding of labels used in Latin-America among low- and middle-income Mexican adults. METHODS:Participants (n =?2105) were randomly assigned to one of three labels: Mexican Guideline Daily Allowances (GDA), Ecuador's Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL), or Chile's Warning Labels (WL) in red. Label acceptability was evaluated through items regarding likeability, attractiveness and perceived cognitive workload. Objective understanding was evaluated by asking participants to select the product with the lowest nutritional quality among three products. We measured the time participants took to choose the product. Differences in label acceptability, understanding and time required to choose a product across labels were tested. RESULTS:Compared to the GDA, a higher proportion of participants liked the MTL and WL, considered them attractive, and with a lower perceived cognitive workload (p <?0.05). Participants had 4.00 (2.86-5.59) times the odds of correctly identifying the product with the lowest nutritional quality when using the MTL label and 4.52 (3.24-6.29) times the odds when using the WL, in comparison to the GDA. Time required to choose the product was lower for the MTL (Median: 11.25?s; IQR?=?8.00-16.09) and the WL (Median?= 11.94?s, IQR?=?8.56-16.52) compared to the GDA (Median: 15.31?s; IQR?=?10.81-20.21; p <?0.05). No differences were observed between the MTL and the WL. CONCLUSIONS:GDA had the lowest acceptability and understanding among the labels tested. The MTL and the WL were more accepted and understood, and allowed low- and middle-income consumers to make nutrition-quality related decisions more quickly. WL or MTL may foster healthier food choices in the most vulnerable groups in Mexico compared to the current labelling format.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine if the Food Standards Agency nutrient profiling system (FSAm-NPS), which grades the nutritional quality of food products and is used to derive the Nutri-Score front-of-packet label to guide consumers towards healthier food choices, is associated with mortality.DesignPopulation based cohort study.SettingEuropean Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort from 23 centres in 10 European countries.Participants521 324 adults; at recruitment, country specific and validated dietary questionnaires were used to assess their usual dietary intakes. A FSAm-NPS score was calculated for each food item per 100 g content of energy, sugars, saturated fatty acids, sodium, fibre, and protein, and of fruit, vegetables, legumes, and nuts. The FSAm-NPS dietary index was calculated for each participant as an energy weighted mean of the FSAm-NPS score of all foods consumed. The higher the score the lower the overall nutritional quality of the diet.Main outcome measureAssociations between the FSAm-NPS dietary index score and mortality, assessed using multivariable adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression models.ResultsAfter exclusions, 501 594 adults (median follow-up 17.2 years, 8 162 730 person years) were included in the analyses. Those with a higher FSAm-NPS dietary index score (highest versus lowest fifth) showed an increased risk of all cause mortality (n=53 112 events from non-external causes; hazard ratio 1.07, 95% confidence interval 1.03 to 1.10, P<0.001 for trend) and mortality from cancer (1.08, 1.03 to 1.13, P<0.001 for trend) and diseases of the circulatory (1.04, 0.98 to 1.11, P=0.06 for trend), respiratory (1.39, 1.22 to 1.59, P<0.001), and digestive (1.22, 1.02 to 1.45, P=0.03 for trend) systems. The age standardised absolute rates for all cause mortality per 10 000 persons over 10 years were 760 (men=1237; women=563) for those in the highest fifth of the FSAm-NPS dietary index score and 661 (men=1008; women=518) for those in the lowest fifth.ConclusionsIn this large multinational European cohort, consuming foods with a higher FSAm-NPS score (lower nutritional quality) was associated with a higher mortality for all causes and for cancer and diseases of the circulatory, respiratory, and digestive systems, supporting the relevance of FSAm-NPS to characterise healthier food choices in the context of public health policies (eg, the Nutri-Score) for European populations. This is important considering ongoing discussions about the potential implementation of a unique nutrition labelling system at the European Union level.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Front-of-pack (FOP) nutrition warning labels to identify potentially harmful foods/beverages have recently been considered in Singapore. The objective of this study was to pilot test two promising FOP warning labels intended to reduce purchases of products high in sugar to determine whether a full scale trial testing one or both these labels using actual purchases is warranted. METHODS:Five hundred twelve participants ?21?years old and residing in Singapore completed all study elements online via the NUSMart Online Grocery Store study website. The study was designed as a Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) where consumers were randomized and asked to hypothetically shop in one of three versions of an online grocery store; 1) no FOP label (control), 2) a graphical high-in-sugar label shaped like a stop sign, or 3) a text-based warning label. The proportion of labelled products purchased (primary outcome) and all secondary measures of diet quality were calculated using participants' orders. Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression was used to compare purchasing behavior across the three study arms. RESULTS:The proportion of high-in-sugar products selected (i.e., those targeted for labelling) was largest in the no label control arm at 20%. The proportion was a non-statistically significant 2 percentage points lower (P?=?0.146) for the high-in-sugar stop-sign label arm and 4 percentage points lower (P?<?0.05) in the warning label with deterrent text arm. We could not reject the hypothesis of equal effectiveness of the two warning labels (P?=?0.231). CONCLUSIONS:Results suggest that the two health warning labels have potential to reduce demand for high-in-sugar products in Singapore. Future studies should test the influence of these labels using actual purchases in efforts to identify whether either labelling strategy should be considered for adoption in the local setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION:The American Economic Association's registry for randomized controlled trials; AEARCTR-0003800 . Registered 18 January 2019.

Project description:BackgroundTo date, no consensus has emerged on the most appropriate front-of-pack (FOP) nutrition label to help consumers in making informed choices. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of the label formats currently in use: nutrient-specific, graded and simple summary systems, in a large sample of adults.MethodsThe FOP label effectiveness was assessed by measuring the label acceptability and understanding among 13,578 participants of the NutriNet-Santé cohort study, representative of the French adult population. Participants were exposed to five conditions, including four FOP labels: Guideline Daily Amounts (GDA), Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL), 5-Color Nutrition Label (5-CNL), Green Tick (Tick), and a "no label" condition. Acceptability was evaluated by several indicators: attractiveness, liking and perceived cognitive workload. Objective understanding was assessed by the percentage of correct answers when ranking three products according to their nutritional quality. Five different product categories were tested: prepared fish dishes, pizzas, dairy products, breakfast cereals, and appetizers. Differences among the label effectiveness were compared with chi-square tests.ResultsThe 5-CNL was viewed as the easiest label to identify and as the one requiring the lowest amount of effort and time to understand. GDA was considered as the least easy to identify and to understand, despite being the most attractive and liked label. All FOP labels were found to be effective in ranking products according to their nutritional quality compared with the "no label" situation, although they showed differing levels of effectiveness (p<0.0001). Globally, the 5-CNL performed best, followed by MTL, GDA and Tick labels.ConclusionsThe graded 5-CNL label was considered as easy to identify, simple and rapid to understand; it performed well when comparing the products' nutritional quality. Therefore, it is likely to present advantages in real shopping situations where choices are usually made quickly.

Project description:Front-of-pack nutrition labels (FoPLs) aim at increasing transparency and consumers' awareness of the nutritional composition of pre-packed food products in order to improve the nutritional quality of their food choices. Nevertheless, the legitimacy of the Nutri-Score - the FoPL officially adopted in France and several other European countries - is subject to both technical and political controversy, particularly in Italy. In this study, we investigated how and by whom the legitimacy of the Nutri-Score, recognized by several institutional authorities, could be deconstructed within a specific system of norms, values and beliefs among Italian stakeholders. A netnography completed with qualitative interviews with eight Italian and French nutrition and public health experts were carried out to highlight the dimensions (pragmatic, normative and cognitive) in which the Nutri-Score's legitimacy is being challenged among the stakeholders involved in FoPLs' implementation in Italy. The degree of influence and the position of these stakeholders on the debate around the Nutri-Score were assessed through the Stakeholder Theory (SHT), using their respective level of power, legitimacy and urgency. Furthermore, we compared the Italian and the French contexts on the issue. The direct implication of political parties and media outlets in framing the Italian debate around Nutri-Score as well as the high influence of corporate unions, led to a different political outcome than in France. Results also show that the deconstruction of the legitimacy of the Nutri-Score in Italy pertained mainly to its pragmatic dimension according to the Italian public health experts. Nevertheless, its two other dimensions (normative and cognitive) are also questioned by high-influence stakeholders. Due to the limited mobilization of scientific expertise over the issue, the debate in Italy stayed centered around the "attack" of the Nutri-Score to the Italian way of life, mixing up concepts such as Made in Italy products and the Mediterranean diet.

Dataset Information

Association of perception of front-of-pack labels with dietary, lifestyle and health characteristics.

Objective

Design

Participants/setting

Outcome measures

Statistical analyses

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Association of perception of front-of-pack labels with dietary, lifestyle and health characteristics.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets