Dataset Information

Allergen labelling: Current practice and improvement from a communication perspective.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Allergen information on product labels is crucial in food allergy management, though inadequacy in current labelling practices is one of the major causes for accidental reactions upon consuming prepacked food products.

Objective

This study analyses current status of communicating allergen information on food labels and provides practical recommendations for improving the label format based on communication theory.

Methods

Product labels (N 288) of seven food categories from private label products and brands were obtained at three retailers in the Netherlands. Information regarding the 14 EU-regulated allergens was evaluated by the frequency of emphasizing allergens in the ingredient list, use of precautionary allergen labelling (PAL), icons and an allergen information section. Effectiveness of communication was assessed evaluating readability and findability of information on allergens using principles of Gestalt and Cognitive Load theories.

Results

As requested by EU regulation 1169/2011, emphasizing allergens in the ingredient list was almost 100%, all other presentations of information on allergens on labels was highly diverse. A separate allergen information section was present on most private label products. This section could, but not necessarily did, repeat allergens from the ingredient list and/or give a PAL. Brands often provided a PAL at the end of the ingredient list. Part of the products displayed an icon at different locations of the label. Label background, a lack of cohesion and variation in location of topics hamper the identification of relevant information on allergens by (allergic) consumers. Recommendations include a standardized order for mandatory and voluntary topics on the label and a separate allergen information section.

Conclusion and clinical relevance

Overall, consumers encounter a wide and inconsistent range in ways of presentation of allergen information on labels. Standardization according to basic design principles can improve usability and support safe food purchases for allergic consumers.

SUBMITTER: Blom WM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8048984 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe number of blood tests ordered in primary care continues to increase and the timely and appropriate communication of results remains essential. However, the testing and result communication process includes a number of participants in a variety of settings and is both complicated to manage and vulnerable to human error. In the UK, guidelines for the process are absent and research in this area is surprisingly scarce; so before we can begin to address potential areas of weakness there is a need to more precisely understand the strengths and weaknesses of current systems used by general practices and testing facilities.MethodsWe conducted a telephone survey of practices across England to determine the methods of managing the testing and result communication process. In order to gain insight into the perspectives from staff at a large hospital laboratory we conducted paired interviews with senior managers, which we used to inform a service blueprint demonstrating the interaction between practices and laboratories and identifying potential sources of delay and failure.ResultsStaff at 80% of practices reported that the default method for communicating normal results required patients to telephone the practice and 40% of practices required that patients also call for abnormal results. Over 80% had no fail-safe system for ensuring that results had been returned to the practice from laboratories; practices would otherwise only be aware that results were missing or delayed when patients requested results. Persistent sources of missing results were identified by laboratory staff and included sample handling, misidentification of samples and the inefficient system for collating and resending misdirected results.ConclusionsThe success of the current system relies on patients both to retrieve results and in so doing alert staff to missing and delayed results. Practices appear slow to adopt available technological solutions despite their potential for reducing the impact of recurring errors in the handling of samples and the reporting of results. Our findings will inform our continuing work with patients and staff to develop, implement and evaluate improvements to existing systems of managing the testing and result communication process.

Project description:BackgroundFood product labelling can support consumer decision-making. Several food product labels (nutrition information panels (NIPs), ingredients lists, allergen declarations and country-of-origin) are mandated for physical product packaging in Australia, with a voluntary front-of-pack nutrition labelling system, Health Star Ratings (HSRs), also available. However, labelling requirements are not explicitly extended to online settings and the extent to which this information is available in these increasingly important food environments has not been assessed.MethodsData from all individual food product pages was collected from the online stores of the two dominant supermarket retailers in Australia using automated web scraping in April-May 2022 (n = 22,077 products collected). We assessed the proportion of pages displaying NIPs, ingredients, allergens, country-of-origin and HSRs after excluding products ineligible to display the respective label. We also assessed whether HSRs were differentially available for higher- (healthier) and lower-scoring (less healthy) products, with HSR scores drawn from a comprehensive Australian food composition database, FoodSwitch. A manual inspection of randomly selected product pages (n = 100 for each label type per supermarket), drawn from products displaying the relevant label, was conducted to assess whether the labels were immediately visible to users (i.e. without scrolling or clicking). Differences in labelling prevalence and visibility were compared using chi-squared tests.ResultsAcross both supermarkets, country-of-origin labelling was almost complete (displayed on 93% of food product pages), but NIPs (49%), ingredients (34%) and allergens (53%) were less frequently displayed. HSRs were infrequently displayed (14% across both supermarkets) and more likely to be applied to higher-scoring products (22% on products with ≥ 3.5HSR v 0.4% on products with < 3.5HSR, p < 0.001). One supermarket was far more likely to make NIPs (100% v 2%, p < 0.001), ingredients (100% v 19%, p < 0.001) and allergens (97% v 0%, p < 0.001) information immediately visible, though the other made HSRs more apparent (22% v 75%, p < 0.001). Both supermarkets displayed country-of-origin labels prominently (100% v 86%, p < 0.001).ConclusionsFood product labelling varies in online supermarkets in Australia overall and between supermarkets, while the design of online stores resulted in differences in labelling visibility. The near-complete display of country-of-origin labels and differential application of HSRs to higher-scoring products may reflect their use as marketing tools. Our findings highlight an urgent need for food labelling regulations to be updated to better account for online retail food environments.