Role of different nutrient profiling models in identifying targeted foods for front-of-package food labelling in Brazil.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To compare the degree of strictness and agreement of different nutrient profiling models (NPM) used to identify which foods would be required to show front-of-package (FOP) warning labels.Design
Using data of 11 434 packaged foods found in the five largest food retailers in Brazil, we used two published NPM: the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) model and the NPM used in the Chilean nutritional FOP labelling policy, and compared them with a NPM proposed by the Brazilian National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa). The proportion of foods that would be required to show FOP warning labels was calculated overall and by food category. We also tested whether a modified version of the PAHO NPM would behave similarly to the original version.Setting
Brazil.Results
Two-thirds of the packaged products (62 %) would receive FOP warning labels under the PAHO NPM, as compared with 45 % of products using the proposed Anvisa NPM and 41 % if the Chilean NPM was applied. The PAHO NPM identified more foods high in critical nutrients such as sweetened dairy and non-dairy beverages, canned vegetables and convenience foods. Overall agreement between models was considered good with kappa coefficient ranging from 0·57 to 0·92 but was lower for some food categories.Conclusions
We found variations in the degree of strictness and agreement between assessed NPM. The PAHO NPM identified more foods and beverages high in sugar which are among the top contributors to sugar and energy intake in Brazil.
SUBMITTER: Duran AC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8025091 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:indicator front-of-package nutrition labelling schemes are gaining momentum. In Europe, an example of such a scheme is Nutri-Score, which was first introduced in France. Supported by additional research, the scheme has the potential to expand into other countries. Such a scenario opens a series of questions related to the use of Nutri-Score in the territories with pre-existing food labelling schemes. A key question is whether different nutrition labelling schemes would provide conflicting information for consumers when applied to same foods. The goal of our study was, therefore, to evaluate the alignment of different front-of-package nutrition labelling schemes. The study was conducted using cross-sectional data on the composition of selected categories of prepacked foods with high penetration nutrition/health claims and symbols in the Slovenian food supply. We evaluated a variety of existing front-of-package nutrition labelling schemes: three interpretive nutrition rating systems (Nutri-Score, Health Star Rating (HSR), Traffic light system), four health symbols (Protective Food symbol, Choices, Finnish heart, and Keyhole symbol), and also three nutrient profile models developed for other purposes (Office of Communications (United Kingdom, Ofcom), World Health Organization Regional office for Europe (WHOE) and Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ)). Overall, our results indicate that interpretive nutrition rating systems (i.e., Nutri-Score) are mostly less strict than the nutrient profiles of tested health symbols. A risk of conflicting information would happen in a scenario where food is eligible to carry a health symbol, but is at the same time rated to have lower nutritional quality by an accompanying interpretive nutrition rating system. When Protective Food symbol and Nutri-Score are used together, this would occur for 5% of foods in our sample. To avoid such risks, schemes for health symbols could be adapted to be stricter than interpretive nutrition rating systems used in the same territory/market, but such adaptations are challenging and should be well planned. While our study showed that, in most cases, Nutri-Score is a less strict model than tested health symbols, the rating-system approach might offer useful support and incentive for food producers towards gradual food reformulation.
| S-EPMC7230759 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundA global push to reduce the amount of saturated and trans-fatty acids, added salt and sugar in processed food, and to enhance fruit, vegetable and whole grain intake, while limiting energy intake, exists for most populations.ObjectivesTo redesign the International Choices Program (note: this is unrelated to the US Smart Choices Program), initially Netherlands focused, by an international board of scientists to create a generic, global front-of-pack nutrition logo system that helps consumers make healthier food choices and stimulates product reformulation.MethodsThe Programme is a product-group-specific-nutrient-profiling approach with a distinction between basic and discretionary foods. The basic product groups are main contributors of essential and beneficial nutrients, and are based on food-based dietary guidelines from more than 20 countries across the globe. Generic criteria are derived from international nutrient recommendations for trans-fatty acids, saturated fatty acids, sodium, added sugar, fibre and energy, and evaluated against food composition data from 12 countries across Europe and market reality (actual foods on the market). Selected debates such as the source of fibre are also presented.ResultsGeneric criteria and a decision framework were developed to further define food categories, so as to meet the unique country- and region-specific dietary needs. The result is a complete set of criteria that is evaluated on a regular basis to ensure its alignment with international dietary patterns, new scientific insights and current developments within the food market.ConclusionsThese guidelines are currently used in a number of countries across the globe, and are being evaluated for effectiveness. Completed studies have demonstrated an increase in consumer awareness, a positive effect on product innovation and a potential impact on nutrient intakes.
| S-EPMC3208753 | biostudies-literature
Project 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.
| S-EPMC7068974 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Policies that require front-of-package (FoP) nutrient warnings are becoming increasingly common across the globe as a strategy to discourage excess consumption of sugary drinks and ultra-processed food. However, a better understanding of the pathway through which FoP nutrient warnings work, as well as a review of how outcomes being measured in recent studies map onto this pathway, are needed in order to inform policy on the most effective FoP label design for reducing purchases of ultra-processed foods. This scoping review describes a conceptual model for how FoP nutrient warnings affect consumer behavior, examines which of these outcomes are currently being measured, and summarizes evidence from randomized controlled experiments. Twenty-two studies which experimentally tested nutrient warnings against a control label or other labeling systems were included for full-text review. Our conceptual model includes attention; comprehension, cognitive elaboration, and message acceptance; negative affect and risk perception; behavioral intentions, and behavioral response, along with other elements such as external factors and interpersonal communications. We found that many studies focused on outcomes such as attention, comprehension, and behavioral intentions, but considerable gaps in the evidence remain, particularly for intermediary steps on the pathway to behavioral change, such as negative affect and social interactions. FoP nutrient warnings were visually attended to by consumers, easy to understand, helped consumers identify products high in nutrients of concern, and discouraged them from purchasing these products, although other labeling systems were perceived as containing more information and performed better at helping consumers rank the healthfulness of products. More research is needed to understand whether and how nutrient warnings work in the real world to discourage consumer purchases of sugary drinks and ultra-processed food.
| S-EPMC7071470 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We assessed the prevalence of front-of-package (FoP) claims in the Brazilian packaged food supply and examined whether foods with claims were more likely to be high in critical nutrients. Using data from a random 30% subsample of 11,434 foods and beverages collected in the five largest food retailers in Brazil in 2017 (n = 3491), we classified claims into nutrition, health, and environment. We examined whether foods with claims were more likely to be high in critical nutrients using 95% confidence intervals. Claims were found in 41.2% of the products. Nutrition claims were the most prevalent (28.5%), followed by health (22.1%), and environment-related claims (5.2%). More than 85% of the breakfast cereals, granola bars, and nectars contained claims, which were found in 51% of the dairy beverages. Foods with nutrition claims were more likely to be high in critical nutrients (65.3%; 95% CI 62.3, 68.2% vs. 54.1% 95% CI 52.1, 56.0). Products with health (52.9%; 95% CI 49.3, 56.4% vs. 58.5%; 95% CI 56.6, 60.3) and environment-related claims (33.5%; 95% CI 27.0, 40.8% vs. 58.6%; 95% CI 56.9, 60.2%) were less likely to be high in critical nutrients. FoP claims are prevalent in Brazil, and nutrition claims are more likely to have a poorer nutritional profile. Policymakers should consider restricting the presence of claims on unhealthy products.
| S-EPMC6950677 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Front-of-package food labeling (FoPFL) is increasingly advocated as an effective intervention to facilitate behavior changes toward healthier food purchasing and consumption, particularly in relation to products with added sugar. The present study assessed the potential caries-related impacts of FoPFL, using Germany as an example. The outcomes of interest were caries lesions prevented, dental treatment costs avoided, productivity loss reductions, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted. The baseline consumption of added sugar was derived from the German National Nutrition Survey. The reduction in sugar intake due to FoPFL was modeled according to estimates from a recent meta-analysis. Microsimulations were performed for 500,000 individuals and over a time horizon of 10 y. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to check the robustness of results. For the period from 2017 to 2027, FoPFL was identified to prevent 2,370,715 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2,062,730-2,678,700) caries lesions and avert 677.62 (95% CI, 589.59-765.65) DALYs. Treatment cost savings amounted to €175.67 million (95% CI, €152.85-€198.49), and productivity losses reduced by €27.33 million (95% CI, €23.78-€30.88). Sensitivity analyses showed that the magnitude of the effects is highly dependent on consumers' response to FoPFL. Our findings suggest that FoPFL has the potential to substantially reduce caries increment, caries-related morbidity, and economic burden. In addition, our study allows for the inclusion of oral health estimates in overall health estimates for sugar-related food labeling. Before prioritizing a strategy to tackle sugar consumption, decision makers should carefully consider all relevant context-specific factors and implementation costs.
| S-EPMC8058828 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFront-of package (FoP) nutrition labels are an option to guide consumer's decision at the point of food purchase. Chile was the first country worldwide to implement a FoP warning label and thereafter several countries have followed this model. The objective of this study is to describe the process of development of the Chilean FoP warning label.MethodsA stepwise study was conducted including literature review, qualitative phase (lay audience & expert group meetings) and quantitative phase in women/adolescents from low-middle-socioeconomic status neighborhoods, Santiago, Chile (2 sub-studies, using point-of-sale questionnaires). Outcomes were prototype visualization, ease of understanding, and ability to modify purchase behavior.ResultsThe literature review and qualitative phase provided information on general text (e.g. short wording) and design characteristics (e.g. use of a logo, use of red or black colors); based on these characteristics 15 prototypes were created and quantitatively tested. In the first survey, a black-&-white stop sign and a black-&-white hand were preselected; in the second survey, the stop sign stating 'Excess of <nutrient>' had significantly better performance than the hand in terms of visualization, intention to purchase, and ability to modify intended purchase. Due to legal reasons the "excess of" was replaced by "high-in" in the final implementation of the law.ConclusionsA simple black-&-white stop sign warning label was the best option to flag pre-packaged foods with an excess of energy or nutrients of concern for non-communicable diseases; this FoP warning label was implemented in Chile in June 2016 as part of the Chilean Food Labeling and Marketing Law.
| S-EPMC6615240 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe National Academy of Medicine recommends that the U.S. adopt an interpretative front-of-package food labeling system, but uncertainty remains about how this system should be designed. This study examined reactions to front-of-package food labeling systems that use positive labels to identify healthier foods, negative labels to identify unhealthier foods, or both.MethodsIn August 2021, U.S. adults (N=3,051) completed an online randomized experiment. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 labeling conditions: control (calorie), positive, negative, or both positive and negative labels. Labels were adapted from designs for a 'healthy' label drafted by the Food and Drug Administration and displayed on the front of product packaging. Participants selected products to purchase, identified healthier products, and reported reactions to the labels. Analyses, conducted in 2022, examined the healthfulness of participants' selections using the Ofcom Nutrient Profiling Model score (0-100, higher scores indicate being healthier).ResultsParticipants exposed to only positive labels, only negative labels, or both positive and negative labels had healthier selections than participants in the control arm (differences vs control=1.13 [2%], 2.34 [4%] vs 3.19 [5%], respectively; all p<0.01). The both-positive-and-negative-labels arm outperformed the only-negative-labels (p=0.03) and only-positive-labels (p<0.001) arms. The only-negative-labels arm outperformed the only-positive-labels arm (p=0.005). All the 3 interpretative labeling systems also led to improvements in the identification of healthier products and beneficial psychological reactions (e.g., attention, thinking about health effects; all p<0.05).ConclusionsFront-of-package food labeling systems that use both positive and negative labels could encourage healthier purchases and improve understanding more than systems using only positive or only negative labels.
| S-EPMC10166580 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Front-of-package warning label (FOPWL) policies incentivize the food industry to reduce the content of regulated nutrients in products. We explored changes in the content of nutrients of concern (sugar, saturated fat, trans fat, and sodium) and the percentage of products in the Peruvian food supply that would carry a FOPWL before and after Peru's implementation of FOPWLs. Longitudinal data on the top-selling foods and beverages (n = 94) were collected at three time points: three months before the implementation of the policy, four months after, and two years after. Using the nutritional information declared on products' labels, we compared quantities of nutrients of concern and the percentage of foods that would carry a FOPWL at each time point. Between the first and the third data collection, a decrease in the median sugar content of beverages was observed (from 9.0 to 5.9 g/100 mL, p = 0.005), accompanied by an increase in the use of nonnutritive sweeteners. This change drove the reduction of the percentage of beverages that would carry a FOPWL (from 59 to 31%, p = 0.011). Among foods, decreases were observed in saturated fat (from 6.7 to 5.9 g/100 g, p = 0.002). The percentage of foods that would carry a FOPWL according to their nutritional profile declined from before to after implementation of the policy (from 82 to 62%, p < 0.001). The study shows that the industry reformulated products in Peru after implementation of its FOPWL policy.
| S-EPMC9819345 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Front-of-package labeling (FOPL) is a policy tool that helps consumers to make informed food choices. South Africa has not yet implemented this labeling system. The aim of this study was therefore to explore adult South African consumers' perceptions of front-of-package warning labels on foods and non-alcoholic beverages (referred to as drinks in this paper) and their insights into features that could influence the effectiveness of the warning label. Using a qualitative approach, the study purposively selected consumers diversified by urbanization, gender, socioeconomic status, and literacy. We collected data from a total of 113 participants through 12 focus group discussions. Data were systematically coded and divided into five themes namely, positive attitudes toward warning labels, perceived benefits of warning labels, perceived behavior modification, perceived beneficiaries of warning labels, and effective attributes of warning labels. Almost all participants from all socio-economic backgrounds were positive about warning labels, reporting that warning labels concisely and understandably educated them about the nutritional composition of foods. Other perceived advantages were that warning labels warn of health implications, are easily understandable and could benefit child health. Some participants anticipated that warning labels would reduce their purchases of unhealthy foods, while others thought the labels would have no effect on their purchasing habits. Participants found the warning labels attention grabbing and stated that they preferred a black triangle placed on a white background (referred to as a holding strap henceforth), the words "high in" and "warning" in bold and uppercase text, an exclamation mark, and an icon depicting the excessive nutrient. In South Africa warning labels may improve consumer understanding of nutrition information and assist consumers in determining the nutritional quality of packaged foods and drinks.
| S-EPMC8475997 | biostudies-literature