Evaluation of the impact of calorie labeling on McDonald's restaurant menus: a natural experiment.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Petimar J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6829981 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveEvidence on the effects of restaurant calorie labeling on consumer and restaurant behavior is mixed. This paper examined: (1) consumer responses to calorie information alone or compared to modified calorie information and (2) changes in restaurant offerings following or in advance of menu labeling implementation.MethodsSearches were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Policy File, and PAIS International to identify restaurant calorie labeling studies through October 1, 2016, that measured calories ordered, consumed, or available for purchase on restaurant menus. The reference lists of calorie labeling articles were also searched.ResultsFifty-three studies were included: 18 in real-world restaurants, 9 in cafeterias, and 21 in laboratory or simulation settings. Five examined restaurant offerings.ConclusionsBecause of a lack of well-powered studies with strong designs, the degree to which menu labeling encourages lower-calorie purchases and whether that translates to a healthier population are unclear. Although there is limited evidence that menu labeling affects calories purchased at fast-food restaurants, some evidence demonstrates that it lowers calories purchased at certain types of restaurants and in cafeteria settings. The limited data on modified calorie labels find that such labels can encourage lower-calorie purchases but may not differ in effects relative to calorie labels alone.
| S-EPMC5752125 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:Obesity is a pressing public health problem without proven population-wide solutions. Researchers sought to determine whether a city-mandated policy requiring calorie labeling at fast food restaurants was associated with consumer awareness of labels, calories purchased and fast food restaurant visits. DESIGN AND METHODS:Difference-in-differences design, with data collected from consumers outside fast food restaurants and via a random digit dial telephone survey, before (December 2009) and after (June 2010) labeling in Philadelphia (which implemented mandatory labeling) and Baltimore (matched comparison city). Measures included: self-reported use of calorie information, calories purchased determined via fast food receipts, and self-reported weekly fast-food visits. RESULTS:The consumer sample was predominantly Black (71%), and high school educated (62%). Postlabeling, 38% of Philadelphia consumers noticed the calorie labels for a 33% point (P?<?0.001) increase relative to Baltimore. Calories purchased and number of fast food visits did not change in either city over time. CONCLUSIONS:While some consumers report noticing and using calorie information, no population level changes were noted in calories purchased or fast food visits. Other controlled studies are needed to examine the longer term impact of labeling as it becomes national law.
| S-EPMC3947482 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Restaurant menu calorie labeling is regarded as a promising, cost-effective, and innovative method that will have an impact on the food environment, raise awareness among consumers, and aid in global efforts to prevent obesity. This study aimed to assess the public's calorie literacy, dining practices, and perceived effectiveness of restaurant menu labeling implementation in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). A descriptive, web-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 1279 adults in the UAE. Socio-demographic characteristics, calorie literacy, and perceived effectiveness of restaurant menu labeling among participants were investigated. Chi-square analysis was used to compare indicators across demographic characteristics. More females than males completed the online survey, (56.1% and 43.9%). Most of the participants aged < 30 years old (54.8%), The majority of participants reported eating away from home at least once per week (89.6%). 66.0% of participants were knowledgeable about calorie definition, but only 37.1% knew about average daily energy requirements. Younger participants, with a normal BMI, and higher education levels reported a significantly higher likelihood of eating at a chain restaurant with caloric information on the menu (p <0.05). The majority of participants (76.0%) preferred to see calorie information and other nutrition information on menus. To conclude, menu labeling is a welcomed policy to be implemented in food outlets. Further investigation is necessary to ascertain the most efficacious method of presenting nutrition information to consumers to facilitate informed purchasing decisions considering the potential benefits of mandating calorie declaration in obesity prevention efforts.
| S-EPMC10597515 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCalorie menu labeling is a policy that requires food establishments to post the calories on menu offerings to encourage healthy food choice. Calorie labeling has been implemented in the United States since May 2018 per the Affordable Care Act, but to the best of our knowledge, no studies have evaluated the relationship between calorie labeling and meal purchases since nationwide implementation of this policy. Our objective was to investigate the relationship between calorie labeling and the calorie and nutrient content of purchased meals after a fast food franchise began labeling in April 2017, prior to the required nationwide implementation, and after nationwide implementation of labeling in May 2018, when all large US chain restaurants were required to label their menus.Methods and findingsWe obtained weekly aggregated sales data from 104 restaurants that are part of a fast food franchise for 3 national chains in 3 US states: Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. The franchise provided all sales data from April 2015 until April 2019. The franchise labeled menus in April 2017, 1 year prior to the required nationwide implementation date of May 2018 set by the US Food and Drug Administration. We obtained nutrition information for items sold (calories, fat, carbohydrates, protein, saturated fat, sugar, dietary fiber, and sodium) from Menustat, a publicly available database with nutrition information for items offered at the top revenue-generating US restaurant chains. We used an interrupted time series to find level and trend changes in mean weekly calorie and nutrient content per transaction after franchise and nationwide labeling. The analytic sample represented 331,776,445 items purchased across 67,112,342 transactions. Franchise labeling was associated with a level change of -54 calories/transaction (95% confidence interval [CI]: -67, -42, p < 0.0001) and a subsequent 3.3 calories/transaction increase per 4-week period (95% CI: 2.5, 4.1, p < 0.0001). Nationwide implementation was associated with a level decrease of -82 calories/transaction (95% CI: -88, -76, p < 0.0001) and a subsequent -2.1 calories/transaction decrease per 4-week period (95% CI: -2.9, -1.3, p < 0.0001). At the end of the study, the model-based predicted mean calories/transaction was 4.7% lower (change = -73 calories/transaction, 95% CI: -81, -65), and nutrients/transaction ranged from 1.8% lower (saturated fat) to 7.0% lower (sugar) than what we would expect had labeling not been implemented. The main limitations were potential residual time-varying confounding and lack of individual-level transaction data.ConclusionsIn this study, we observed that calorie labeling was associated with small decreases in mean calorie and nutrient content of fast food meals 2 years after franchise labeling and nearly 1 year after implementation of labeling nationwide. These changes imply that calorie labeling was associated with small improvements in purchased meal quality in US chain restaurants.
| S-EPMC8312920 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSupply-side reductions to the calories in chain restaurants are a possible benefit of upcoming menu labeling requirements.PurposeTo describe trends in calories available in large U.S. restaurants.MethodsData were obtained from the MenuStat project, a census of menu items in 66 of the 100 largest U.S. restaurant chains, for 2012 and 2013 (N=19,417 items). Generalized linear models were used to calculate (1) the mean change in calories from 2012 to 2013, among items on the menu in both years; and (2) the difference in mean calories, comparing newly introduced items to those on the menu in 2012 only (overall and between core versus non-core items). Data were analyzed in 2014.ResultsMean calories among items on menus in both 2012 and 2013 did not change. Large restaurant chains in the U.S. have recently had overall declines in calories in newly introduced menu items (-56 calories, 12% decline). These declines were concentrated mainly in new main course items (-67 calories, 10% decline). New beverage (-26 calories, 8% decline) and children's (-46 calories, 20% decline) items also had fewer mean calories. Among chain restaurants with a specific focus (e.g., burgers), average calories in new menu items not core to the business declined more than calories in core menu items.ConclusionsLarge chain restaurants significantly reduced the number of calories in newly introduced menu items. Supply-side changes to the calories in chain restaurants may have a significant impact on obesity prevention.
| S-EPMC4274249 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Globalization via free trade and investment agreements is often implicated in the obesity pandemic. Concerns center on how free trade and investment agreements increase population exposure to unhealthy, high-calorie diets, but existing studies preclude causal conclusions. Few studies of free trade and investment agreements and diets isolated their impact from confounding changes, and none examined any effect on caloric intake, despite its critical role in the etiology of obesity. This study addresses these limitations by analyzing a unique natural experiment arising from the exceptional circumstances surrounding the implementation of the 1989 Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement. METHODS:Data from the UN (2017) were analyzed using fixed-effects regression models and the synthetic control method to estimate the impact of the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement on calorie availability in Canada, 1978-2006, and coinciding increases in U.S. exports and investment in Canada's food and beverage sector. The impact of changes to calorie availability on body weights was then modeled. RESULTS:Calorie availability increased by ≅170 kilocalories per capita per day in Canada after the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement. There was a coinciding rise in U.S. trade and investment in the Canadian food and beverage sector. This rise in calorie availability is estimated to account for an average weight gain of between 1.8 kg and 12.2 kg in the Canadian population, depending on sex and physical activity levels. CONCLUSIONS:The Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement was associated with a substantial rise in calorie availability in Canada. U.S. free trade and investment agreements can contribute to rising obesity and related diseases by pushing up caloric intake.
| S-EPMC5906641 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTest the efficacy and perceived effectiveness of nutrition labels on children's menus from a full-service chain restaurant in an online study.DesignUsing a between-groups experiment, parents were randomised to view children's menus displaying one of five children's nutrition labelling conditions: (i) No Nutrition Information (control); (ii) Calories Only; (iii) Calories + Contextual Statement (CS); (iv) Calories, Sodium + CS; or (v) Calories and Sodium in Traffic Lights + CS. Parents hypothetically ordered up to one entrée, side, beverage and dessert for their child, then rated and ranked all five labelling conditions on the level of perceived effectiveness.SettingOnline survey.Participants998 parents with a 3-12 year old child.ResultsParents exposed to menus displaying 'Calories, Sodium + CS' selected significantly fewer calories 'overall' (entrées + side + dessert + beverage) compared to parents exposed to the control condition (-53·1 calories, P < 0·05). Parents selected 'entrees' with significantly fewer calories and lower sodium when exposed to menus with 'Calories + CS' (-24·3 calories, P < 0·05); 'Calories, Sodium + CS' (-25·4 calories, -56·1 mg sodium, P < 0·05 for both); and 'Calories and Sodium in Traffic Lights + CS' (-29·1 calories, -58·6 mg sodium, P < 0·05 for both). Parents exposed to menus with 'Calories, Sodium + CS' and 'Calories and Sodium in Traffic Lights + CS' were more likely to notice and understand nutrition information compared to other nuntrition labelling conditions. Parents perceived the menu with 'Calories and Sodium in Traffic Lights + CS' as most effective (P < 0·05).ConclusionsMenus disclosing calories, sodium and a contextual statement increased the proportion of parents who noticed and understood nutrition information, and resulted in parents selecting lower calorie and sodium entrées for their children in the hypothetical purchase task.
| S-EPMC10200564 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRecent attempts to improve the healthfulness of away-from-home eating include regulations requiring restaurants to post nutrition information. The impact of such regulations on restaurant environments is unknown.PurposeTo examine changes in restaurant environments from before to after nutrition-labeling regulation in a newly regulated county versus a nonregulated county.MethodsUsing the Nutrition Environment Measures Survey-Restaurant version audit, environments within the same quick-service chain restaurants were evaluated in King County (regulated) before and 6 and 18 months after regulation enforcement and in Multnomah County (nonregulated) restaurants over a 6-month period. Data were collected in 2008-2010 and analyses conducted in 2011.ResultsOverall availability of healthy options and facilitation of healthy eating did not increase differentially in King County versus Multnomah County restaurants aside from the substantial increase in onsite nutrition information posting in King County restaurants required by the new regulation. Barriers to healthful eating decreased in King County relative to Multnomah County restaurants, particularly in food-oriented establishments. King County restaurants demonstrated modest increases in signage that promotes healthy eating, although the frequency of such promotion remained low, and the availability of reduced portions decreased in these restaurants. The healthfulness of children's menus improved modestly over time, but not differentially by county.ConclusionsA restaurant nutrition-labeling regulation was accompanied by some, but not uniform, improvements in other aspects of restaurant environments in the regulated compared to the nonregulated county. Additional opportunities exist for improving the healthfulness of away-from-home eating beyond menu labeling.
| S-EPMC3479434 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate whether calorie labeling of menus in large restaurant chains was associated with a change in mean calories purchased per transaction.DesignQuasi-experimental longitudinal study.SettingLarge franchise of a national fast food company with three different restaurant chains located in the southern United States (Louisiana, Texas, and Mississippi) from April 2015 until April 2018.Participants104 restaurants with calorie information added to in-store and drive-thru menus in April 2017 and with weekly aggregated sales data during the pre-labeling (April 2015 to April 2017) and post-labeling (April 2017 to April 2018) implementation period.Main outcome measuresPrimary outcome was the overall level and trend changes in mean purchased calories per transaction after implementation of calorie labeling compared with the counterfactual (ie, assumption that the pre-intervention trend would have persisted had the intervention not occurred) using interrupted time series analyses with linear mixed models. Secondary outcomes were by item category (entrees, sides, and sugar sweetened beverages). Subgroup analyses estimated the effect of calorie labeling in stratums defined by the sociodemographic characteristics of restaurant census tracts (defined region for taking census).ResultsThe analytic sample comprised 14 352 restaurant weeks. Over three years and among 104 restaurants, 49 062 440 transactions took place and 242 726 953 items were purchased. After labeling implementation, a level decrease was observed of 60 calories/transaction (95% confidence interval 48 to 72; about 4%), followed by an increasing trend of 0.71 calories/transaction/week (95% confidence interval 0.51 to 0.92) independent of the baseline trend over the year after implementation. These results were generally robust to different analytic assumptions in sensitivity analyses. The level decrease and post-implementation trend change were stronger for sides than for entrees or sugar sweetened beverages. The level decrease was similar between census tracts with higher and lower median income, but the post-implementation trend in calories per transaction was higher in low income (change in calories/transaction/week 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 1.21) than in high income census tracts (0.50, 0.19 to 0.81).ConclusionsA small decrease in mean calories purchased per transaction was observed after implementation of calorie labeling in a large franchise of fast food restaurants. This reduction diminished over one year of follow-up.
| S-EPMC6818731 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Added-sugar consumption in the U.S. exceeds recommended limits. Policymakers are considering requiring restaurants to use menu warning labels to indicate items high in added sugar. We sought to determine whether icon-only and icon-plus-text added-sugar menu labels were (1) perceived as more effective at potentially reducing consumption of items high in added sugar and (2) increased knowledge of menu items' added-sugar content relative to control labels, and if effects differed by label design. A national sample of U.S. adults (n = 1327) participated in an online randomized experiment. Participants viewed menu items with either a control label, 1 of 6 icon-only labels, or 1 of 18 icon-plus-text labels with 3 text variations. For their assigned label, participants provided ratings of perceived message effectiveness (a validated scale of a message's potential to change behavior). Participants were also asked to classify menu items by their added-sugar content. The icon-only and icon-plus-text labels were perceived as more effective than the control label (means: 3.7 and 3.7 vs. 3.1, respectively, on a 5-point scale; p < 0.001). The icon-only and icon-plus-text groups each correctly classified 71% of menu items by added-sugar content vs. 56% in the control group (p < 0.001). All icons and text variations were perceived as similarly effective. In conclusion, relative to a control label, icon-only and icon-plus-text added-sugar menu labels were perceived as effective and helped consumers identify items high in added sugar. Menu warning labels may be a promising strategy for reducing added-sugar consumption from restaurants, but research on behavioral effects in real-world settings is needed. Clinical Trials Identifier:NCT04637412.
| S-EPMC9236625 | biostudies-literature