The impact of pictorial health warnings on purchases of sugary drinks for children: A randomized controlled trial
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hall M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8806063 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionFive U.S. states have proposed policies to require health warnings on sugar-sweetened beverages, but warnings' effects on actual purchase behavior remain uncertain. This study evaluated the impact of sugar-sweetened beverage health warnings on sugar-sweetened beverage purchases.Study designParticipants completed one study visit to a life-sized replica of a convenience store in North Carolina. Participants chose six items (two beverages, two foods, and two household products). One item was randomly selected for them to purchase and take home. Participants also completed a questionnaire. Researchers collected data in 2018 and conducted analyses in 2019.Setting/participantsParticipants were a demographically diverse convenience sample of 400 adult sugar-sweetened beverage consumers (usual consumption ≥12 ounces/week).InterventionResearch staff randomly assigned participants to a health warning arm (sugar-sweetened beverages in the store displayed a front-of-package health warning) or a control arm (sugar-sweetened beverages displayed a control label).Main outcome measuresThe primary trial outcome was sugar-sweetened beverage calories purchased. Secondary outcomes included reactions to trial labels (e.g., negative emotions) and sugar-sweetened beverage perceptions and attitudes (e.g., healthfulness).ResultsAll 400 participants completed the trial and were included in analyses. Health warning arm participants were less likely to be Hispanic and to have overweight/obesity than control arm participants. In intent-to-treat analyses adjusting for Hispanic ethnicity and overweight/obesity, health warnings led to lower sugar-sweetened beverage purchases (adjusted difference, -31.4 calories; 95% CI= -57.9, -5.0). Unadjusted analyses yielded similar results (difference, -32.9 calories; 95% CI= -58.9, -7.0). Compared with the control label, sugar-sweetened beverage health warnings also led to higher intentions to limit sugar-sweetened beverage consumption and elicited more attention, negative emotions, thinking about the harms of sugar-sweetened beverage consumption, and anticipated social interactions. Trial arms did not differ on perceptions of sugar-sweetened beverages' added sugar content, healthfulness, appeal/coolness, or disease risk.ConclusionsBrief exposure to health warnings reduced sugar-sweetened beverage purchases in this naturalistic RCT. Sugar-sweetened beverage health warning policies could discourage sugar-sweetened beverage consumption.Trial registrationThis study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT03511937.
| S-EPMC6803129 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Sugary drink warnings are a promising policy for reducing sugary drink consumption, but it remains unknown how to design warnings to maximize their impact overall and among diverse population groups, including parents of Latino ethnicity and parents with low English use. In 2019, we randomized US parents of children ages 2-12 (n = 1078, 48% Latino ethnicity, 13% low English use) to one topic (one of four warnings, or a neutral control), which they viewed on three designs (text-only, icon, and graphic) to assess reactions to the various warnings on sugary drinks. All warning topics were perceived as more effective than the control (average differential effect [ADE] ranged from 1.77 to 1.84 [5-point Likert scale], all p < .001). All warning topics also led to greater thinking about harms of sugary drinks (all p < .001) and lower purchase intentions (all p < .01). Compared to text-only warnings, icon (ADE = 0.18) and graphic warnings (ADE = 0.30) elicited higher perceived message effectiveness, as well as greater thinking about the harms of sugary drinks, lower perceived healthfulness, and lower purchase intentions (all p < .001). The impact of icon warnings (vs. text warnings) was stronger for parents with low English use, compared to those with high English use (p = .024). Similarly, the impact of icon (vs. text warnings) was stronger for Latino parents than non-Latino parents (p = .034). This experimental study indicates that many warning topics hold promise for behavior change and that including images with warnings could increase warning efficacy, particularly among Latino parents and parents with low English use. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04382599.
| S-EPMC8958622 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIncreasing evidence associates excess refined sugar intakes with obesity, Type 2 diabetes and heart disease. Worryingly, the estimated volume of sugary drinks purchased in the UK has more than doubled between 1975 and 2007, from 510 ml to 1140 ml per person per week. We aimed to estimate the potential impact of a duty on sugar sweetened beverages (SSBs) at a local level in England, hypothesising that a duty could reduce obesity and related diseases.Methods and findingsWe modelled the potential impact of a 20% sugary drinks duty on local authorities in England between 2010 and 2030. We synthesised data obtained from the British National Diet and Nutrition Survey (NDNS), drinks manufacturers, Office for National Statistics, and from previous studies. This produced a modelled population of 41 million adults in 326 lower tier local authorities in England. This analysis suggests that a 20% SSB duty could result in approximately 2,400 fewer diabetes cases, 1,700 fewer stroke and coronary heart disease cases, 400 fewer cancer cases, and gain some 41,000 Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) per year across England. The duty might have the biggest impact in urban areas with young populations.ConclusionsThis study adds to the growing body of evidence suggesting health benefits for a duty on sugary drinks. It might also usefully provide results at an area level to inform local price interventions in England.
| S-EPMC4486083 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We aimed to examine the impact of claims, fruit images, and health warnings on consumers' perceptions of fruit-flavored drinks with added sugar (i.e., "fruit drinks"). We conducted three 2x2x2 randomized experiments with online convenience samples of U.S. adults (Study 1 n = 2139 in 2018, current e-cigarette users and smokers; Study 2 n = 670 in 2018, current e-cigarette users; Study 3 n = 1006 in 2019, general sample). Participants viewed a fruit drink that differed in the presence of a "100% Vitamin C" claim, a fruit image, or a health warning. On average across the three studies, consumers who saw a claim on a fruit drink believed that the drink was more healthful than those who did not see the claim (mean average differential effect (ADE) = 0.66, p < .001); they were also more interested in consuming the drink (mean ADE = 0.38, p = .001). The health warning decreased perceived product healthfulness (mean ADE = -0.65, p < .001) and consumption interest (mean ADE = -0.49, p < .001). The fruit image had no effect on perceived product healthfulness (mean ADE = 0.03, p = .81) or purchase intentions (mean ADE = -0.04, p = .77). In Study 1 and Study 2, there were no interactions between claims, images, or warnings (all p > .05). In Study 3, the "100% Vitamin C" nutrition claim only increased perceived product healthfulness when the drink did not also have a health warning (interaction p < .05). These findings suggest that 100% Vitamin C claims increase the appeal of fruit drinks, whereas health warnings decrease the appeal. Together, these studies support policies to restrict marketing and require health warnings on sugar-sweetened beverage packaging.
| S-EPMC7085890 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Policymakers worldwide are considering requiring warnings for sugary drinks. A growing number of experimental studies have examined sugary drink warnings' impacts, but no research to our knowledge has synthesized this literature. To inform ongoing policy debates, this study aimed to identify the effects of sugary drink warnings compared with control conditions. METHODS AND FINDINGS:We systematically searched 7 databases on June 21, 2019, and October 25, 2019. We also searched reference lists of relevant articles. Two investigators independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts to identify peer-reviewed articles that used an experimental protocol to examine the effects of sugary drink warnings compared to a control condition. Two investigators independently extracted study characteristics and effect sizes from all relevant full-text articles. We meta-analyzed any outcome assessed in at least 2 studies, combining effect sizes using random effects meta-analytic procedures. Twenty-three experiments with data on 16,241 individuals (mean proportion female, 58%) were included in the meta-analysis. Most studies took place in Latin America (35%) or the US or Canada (46%); 32% included children. Relative to control conditions, sugary drink warnings caused stronger negative emotional reactions (d = 0.69; 95% CI: 0.25, 1.13; p = 0.002) and elicited more thinking about the health effects of sugary drinks (d = 0.65; 95% CI: 0.29, 1.01; p < 0.001). Sugary drink warnings also led to lower healthfulness perceptions (d = -0.22; 95% CI: -0.27, -0.17; p < 0.001) and stronger disease likelihood perceptions (d = 0.15; 95% CI: 0.06, 0.24; p = 0.001). Moreover, sugary drink warnings reduced both hypothetical (d = -0.32; 95% CI: -0.44, -0.21; p < 0.001) and actual consumption and purchasing behavior (d = -0.17; 95% CI: -0.30, -0.04; p = 0.012). Statistically significant effects were not observed for perceptions of added sugar or positive sugary drink attitudes (p's > 0.10). Moderation analyses revealed that health warnings (e.g., "Beverages with added sugar contribute to obesity") led to greater reductions in hypothetical sugary drink purchases than did nutrient warnings (e.g., "High in sugar"; d = -0.35 versus -0.18; Qb = 4.04; p = 0.04). Limitations of this study include that we did not review grey literature and that we were unable to conduct moderation analyses for several prespecified moderators due to an insufficient number of studies. CONCLUSIONS:This international body of experimental literature supports sugary drink warnings as a population-level strategy for changing behavior, as well as emotions, perceptions, and intentions. PROTOCOL REGISTRY:PROSPERO ID 146405.
| S-EPMC7239392 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Governments have proposed text warning labels to decrease consumption of sugary drinks-a contributor to chronic diseases such as diabetes. However, they may be less effective than more evocative, graphic warning labels. We field-tested the effectiveness of graphic warning labels (vs. text warning labels, calorie labels, and no labels), provided insight into psychological mechanisms driving effectiveness, and assessed consumer sentiment. Study 1 indicated that graphic warning labels reduced the share of sugary drinks purchased in a cafeteria from 21.4% at baseline to 18.2%-an effect driven by substitution of water for sugary drinks. Study 2 showed that graphic warning labels heighten negative affect and prompt consideration of health consequences. Study 3 indicated that public support for graphic warning labels can be increased by conveying effectiveness information. These findings could spur more effective labeling policies that facilitate healthier choices, do not decrease overall beverage purchases, and are publicly accepted.
| S-EPMC6088502 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:Pictorial warnings on cigarette packs are a cost-effective policy-level intervention for smoking cessation; however, little research has examined changes in the impact of warnings over time, especially shortly following the first exposure to pictorial warnings. We sought to characterize the trajectories of responses to pictorial cigarette pack warnings soon after first exposure. Methods:Participants were 2149 adult smokers in North Carolina and California, United States. In 2014-2015, we randomized smokers to have pictorial (intervention) or text-only (control) warnings on their cigarette packs for 4 weeks. Weekly surveys assessed psychosocial and behavioral outcomes. Results:After 1 week, smokers in the intervention arm reported higher levels of most outcomes, compared with the control arm. Over subsequent weeks, smokers in both trial arms had decreases in thinking about the harms of smoking (? = -0.046), positive (? = -0.036), and negative (? = -0.042) smoking reinforcement attitudes, and increases in quit intentions (? = 0.070) and cigarette forgoing (? = 0.137) (all p < .05). Only negative affective reactions decreased more in the intervention versus control condition (pinteraction < .01). Conclusions:The impact of pictorial cigarette pack warnings on emotions and cognitions may wane over time. In contrast, quit intentions and cigarette forgoing may continue to increase, at least during the initial period after introduction. Rotation of pictorial warnings may help prevent warning wear-out. Implications:Cigarette smoking is the leading cause of preventable morbidity and mortality and warnings on cigarette packs are a cost-effective policy-level intervention. Prior studies reporting on cigarette pack warning "wear out" have been limited by being short-term single-session experimental studies. Ours are the first study to experimentally examine the trajectories of several outcomes after first exposure and report that the impact of pictorial cigarette pack warnings on emotions and cognitions may wane over time while quit intentions and cigarette forgoing may continue to increase. Trials Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02247908; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02247908.
| S-EPMC5991219 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe Food and Drug Administration (FDA) selected six text-only warnings for cigarillos to be implemented on packaging and advertising. Pictorial warnings are more effective at discouraging cigarette use than text-only warnings, yet no research exists for cigarillos. We sought to understand what types of images might be most effectively paired with the cigarillo text warnings to inform broad principles for developing pictorial warnings, with a focus on young adults, who have the highest rate of cigarillo use.MethodsWe conducted five focus groups with a total of N = 30 young adult cigarillo users and susceptible nonusers (53% female, 50% White, and 33% Black). Participants were shown four to eight unique images for each of the six text statements and were asked about visual-verbal congruency, emotional and cognitive reactions, and perceived effectiveness of each image. Sessions were recorded and transcribed; two investigators independently coded transcripts for emergent themes.ResultsParticipants reported images that were graphic or "gross" would best grab attention and discourage use of cigarillos. Participants preferred images that were a direct illustration of the information in the warning text, rather than abstract images that required more cognitive effort to understand. Participants also highlighted that including people in the images, especially youth and young adults making eye contact, helped them relate to the warnings, garner their attention, and positively influence their reactions.ConclusionsWe identified several principles to inform the selection of images to pair with the FDA-required cigarillo text statements. These insights may also apply to pictorial warnings for other tobacco products.ImplicationsThis focus group study identified principles for selecting images to develop pictorial warnings for the six FDA text-only cigarillo warnings. We found that young adult cigarillo users and susceptible nonusers preferred images that were graphic and gross, believable, congruent to the warning text, and included people. Images that match young adults' visual expectations of a disease and are emotion-provoking may be most effective in pictorial warnings and highlight challenges for developing pictorial warnings for health effects that do not have a visible health consequence.
| S-EPMC7822103 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Pictorial warnings on cigarette packs draw attention and increase quit intentions, but their effect on smoking behavior remains uncertain.To assess the effect of adding pictorial warnings to the front and back of cigarette packs.This 4-week between-participant randomized clinical trial was carried out in California and North Carolina. We recruited a convenience sample of adult cigarette smokers from the general population beginning September 2014 through August 2015. Of 2149 smokers who enrolled, 88% completed the trial. No participants withdrew owing to adverse events.We randomly assigned participants to receive on their cigarette packs for 4 weeks either text-only warnings (one of the Surgeon General's warnings currently in use in the United States on the side of the cigarette packs) or pictorial warnings (one of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act's required text warnings and pictures that showed harms of smoking on the top half of the front and back of the cigarette packs).The primary trial outcome was attempting to quit smoking during the study. We hypothesized that smokers randomized to receive pictorial warnings would be more likely to report a quit attempt during the study than smokers randomized to receive a text-only Surgeon General's warning.Of the 2149 participants who began the trial (1039 men, 1060 women, and 34 transgender people; mean [SD] age, 39.7 [13.4] years for text-only warning, 39.8 [13.7] for pictorial warnings), 1901 completed it. In intent-to-treat analyses (n?=?2149), smokers whose packs had pictorial warnings were more likely than those whose packs had text-only warnings to attempt to quit smoking during the 4-week trial (40% vs 34%; odds ratio [OR], 1.29; 95% CI, 1.09-1.54). The findings did not differ across any demographic groups. Having quit smoking for at least the 7 days prior to the end of the trial was more common among smokers who received pictorial than those who received text-only warnings (5.7% vs 3.8%; OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.02-2.29). Pictorial warnings also increased forgoing a cigarette, intentions to quit smoking, negative emotional reactions, thinking about the harms of smoking, and conversations about quitting.Pictorial warnings effectively increased intentions to quit, forgoing cigarettes, quit attempts, and successfully quitting smoking over 4 weeks. Our trial findings suggest that implementing pictorial warnings on cigarette packs in the United States would discourage smoking.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02247908.
| S-EPMC5458743 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsThe UK low-risk drinking guidelines (LRDG) recommend not regularly drinking more than 14 units of alcohol per week. We tested the effect of different pictorial representations of alcohol content, some with a health warning, on knowledge of the LRDG and understanding of how many drinks it equates to.DesignParallel randomized controlled trial.SettingOn-line, 25 January-1 February 2019.ParticipantsParticipants (n = 7516) were English, aged over 18 years and drink alcohol.InterventionsThe control group saw existing industry-standard labels; six intervention groups saw designs based on: food labels (serving or serving and container), pictographs (servings or containers), pie charts (servings) or risk gradients. A total of 500 participants (~70 per condition) saw a health warning under the design.MeasurementsPrimary outcomes: (i) knowledge: proportion who answered that the LRDG is 14 units; and (ii) understanding: how many servings/containers of beverages one can drink before reaching 14 units (10 questions, average distance from correct answer).FindingsIn the control group, 21.5% knew the LRDG; proportions were higher in intervention groups (all P < 0.001). The three best-performing designs had the LRDG in a separate statement, beneath the pictograph container: 51.1% [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 3.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 3.08-4.54], pictograph serving 48.8% (aOR = 4.11, 95% CI = 3.39-4.99) and pie-chart serving, 47.5% (aOR = 3.57, 95% CI = 2.93-4.34). Participants underestimated how many servings they could drink: control mean = -4.64, standard deviation (SD) = 3.43; intervention groups were more accurate (all P < 0.001), best performing was pictograph serving (mean = -0.93, SD = 3.43). Participants overestimated how many containers they could drink: control mean = 0.09, SD = 1.02; intervention groups overestimated even more (all P < 0.007), worst-performing was food label serving (mean = 1.10, SD = 1.27). Participants judged the alcohol content of beers more accurately than wine or spirits. The inclusion of a health warning had no statistically significant effect on any measure.ConclusionsLabels with enhanced pictorial representations of alcohol content improved knowledge and understanding of the UK's low-risk drinking guidelines compared with industry-standard labels; health warnings did not improve knowledge or understanding of low-risk drinking guidelines. Designs that improved knowledge most had the low-risk drinking guidelines in a separate statement located beneath the graphics.
| S-EPMC8248341 | biostudies-literature