Search

Abstract Background Regulations mandating kilocalorie (kcal) labelling for large businesses in the out-of-home food sector (OHFS) came into force on 6th April 2022 as a policy to reduce obesity in England. To provide indicators of potential reach and impact, kcal labelling practices were studied in the OHFS, and customer purchasing and consumption behaviours prior to implementation of the mandatory kcal labelling policy in England. Methods From August-December 2021, large OHFS businesses subject to the kcal labelling regulations were visited prior to regulations coming into force on 6th April 2022. 3308 customers were recruited from 330 outlets and collected survey information on the number of kcal purchased and consumed by customers, customers’ knowledge of the kcal content of their purchases, and customers noticing and use of kcal labelling. In a subset of 117 outlets, data was collected on nine recommended kcal labelling practices. Results The average number of kcals purchased (1013 kcal, SD = 632 kcal) was high with 69% of purchases exceeding the recommendation of a maximum of 600 kcal per meal. Participants underestimated the energy content of their purchased meals by on average 253 kcal (SD = 644 kcals). In outlets providing kcal labelling in which customer survey data was collected, a minority of customers reported noticing (21%) or using (20%) kcal labelling. Out of the 117 outlets assessed for kcal labelling practices, 24 (21%) provided any in-store kcal labelling. None of the outlets met all nine aspects of recommended labelling practices. Conclusions Prior to implementation of 2022 kcal labelling policy, the majority of sampled OHFS large business outlets in England did not provide kcal labelling. Few customers noticed or used the labels and on average customers purchased and consumed substantially more energy than recommended in public health guidelines. The findings suggest that reliance on voluntary action for kcal labelling implementation failed to produce widespread, consistent, and adequate kcal labelling practices.

Abstract Background There are well documented socioeconomic disparities in diet quality and obesity. Menu energy labelling is a public health policy designed to improve diet and reduce obesity. However, it is unclear whether the impact energy labelling has on consumer behaviour is socially equitable or differs based on socioeconomic position (SEP). Methods Systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental (between-subjects) and pre-post implementation field studies examining the impact of menu energy labelling on energy content of food and/or drink selections in higher vs. lower SEP groups. Results Seventeen studies were eligible for inclusion. Meta-analyses of 13 experimental studies that predominantly examined hypothetical food and drink choices showed that energy labelling tended to be associated with a small reduction in energy content of selections that did not differ based on participant SEP (X2(1) = 0.26, p = .610). Effect estimates for higher SEP SMD = 0.067 [95% CI: -0.092 to 0.226] and lower SEP SMD = 0.115 [95% CI: -0.006 to 0.237] were similar. A meta-analysis of 3 pre-post implementation studies of energy labelling in the real world showed that the effect energy labelling had on consumer behaviour did not significantly differ based on SEP (X2(1) = 0.22, p = .636). In higher SEP the effect was SMD = 0.032 [95% CI: -0.053 to 0.117] and in lower SEP the effect was SMD = -0.005 [95% CI: -0.051 to 0.041]. Conclusions Overall there was no convincing evidence that the effect energy labelling has on consumer behaviour significantly differs based on SEP. Further research examining multiple indicators of SEP and quantifying the long-term effects of energy labelling on consumer behaviour in real-world settings is now required. Review registration Registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022312532) and OSF ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/W7RDB ).

Background: There are well documented socioeconomic disparities in diet quality and obesity. Menu energy labelling is a public health policy designed to improve diet and reduce obesity. However, it is unclear whether the impact energy labelling has on consumer behaviour is socially equitable or differs based on socioeconomic position (SEP). Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental (between-subjects) and pre-post implementation field studies examining the impact of menu energy labelling on energy content of food and/or drink selections in higher vs. lower SEP groups. Results: Seventeen studies were eligible for inclusion. Meta-analyses of 13 experimental studies that predominantly examined hypothetical food and drink choices showed that energy labelling tended to be associated with a small reduction in energy content of selections that did not differ based on participant SEP (X2(1) = 0.26, p =.610). Effect estimates for higher SEP SMD = 0.067 [95% CI: -0.092 to 0.226] and lower SEP SMD = 0.115 [95% CI: -0.006 to 0.237] were similar. A meta-analysis of 3 pre-post implementation studies of energy labelling in the real world showed that the effect energy labelling had on consumer behaviour did not significantly differ based on SEP (X2(1) = 0.22, p =.636). In higher SEP the effect was SMD = 0.032 [95% CI: -0.053 to 0.117] and in lower SEP the effect was SMD = -0.005 [95% CI: -0.051 to 0.041]. Conclusions: Overall there was no convincing evidence that the effect energy labelling has on consumer behaviour significantly differs based on SEP. Further research examining multiple indicators of SEP and quantifying the long-term effects of energy labelling on consumer behaviour in real-world settings is now required. Review registration: Registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022312532) and OSF (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/W7RDB). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The US has required chain food establishments-including supermarkets-to display calorie labels on prepared (i.e., ready-to-eat) foods since 2018. Implementation of this supermarket calorie labeling policy reduced purchases of prepared foods from supermarkets, but it remains unknown whether the policy is cost-effective., Methods: In 2023-2024, this study applied the Childhood Obesity Intervention Cost-Effectiveness Study (CHOICES) microsimulation model to estimate the effects of the supermarket calorie labeling policy on health, costs, and cost-effectiveness over 10 years (2018-2027) for the US population. The model projected benefits overall and among racial, ethnic, and income subgroups. Sensitivity analyses varied assumptions about the extent to which consumers replace calorie reductions from prepared foods with calories from other sources (i.e., caloric compensation)., Results: From 2018-2027, the supermarket calorie labeling policy was projected to save $348 million in healthcare costs (95% Uncertainty Interval [UI]: $263-426 million), prevent 21,700 cases of obesity (95% UI: 18,200-25,400), including 3,890 cases of childhood obesity (95% UI: 2,680-5,120), and lead to 15,100 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained across the US population (95% UI: 10,900-20,500). The policy was projected to prevent cases of obesity and childhood obesity across all racial, ethnic, and income groups. The policy was projected to be cost-saving when assuming low and moderate caloric compensation and cost-effective when assuming very high caloric compensation., Conclusions: A policy requiring calorie labels on prepared foods in supermarkets was projected to be cost-saving or cost-effective and lead to reductions in obesity across all racial, ethnic, and income groups., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing Interest No financial disclosures have been reported by the authors of this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Menu energy labelling has been implemented as a public health policy to promote healthier dietary choices and reduce obesity. However, it is unclear whether the influence energy labelling has on consumer behaviour differs based on individuals' demographics or characteristics and may therefore produce inequalities in diet. Data were analysed from 12 randomized control trials (N = 8508) evaluating the effect of food and drink energy labelling (vs. labelling absent) on total energy content of food and drink selections (predominantly hypothetical) in European and US adults. Analyses examined the moderating effects of participant age, sex, ethnicity/race, education, household income, body mass index, dieting status, food choice motives and current hunger on total energy content of selections. Energy labelling was associated with a small reduction (f2 = 0.004, −50 kcal, p < 0.001) in total energy selected compared to the absence of energy labelling. Participants who were female, younger, white, university educated, of a higher income status, dieting, motivated by health and weight control when making food choices, and less hungry, tended to select menu items of lower energy content. However, there was no evidence that the effect of energy labelling on the amount of energy selected was moderated by any of the participants' demographics or characteristics. Energy labelling was associated with a small reduction in energy content of food selections and this effect was similar across a range of participants' demographics and characteristics. These preliminary findings suggest that energy labelling policies may not widen existing inequalities in diet. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Regulations mandating kilocalorie (kcal) labelling for large businesses in the out-of-home food sector (OHFS) came into force on 6th April 2022 as a policy to reduce obesity in England. To provide indicators of potential reach and impact, kcal labelling practices were studied in the OHFS, and customer purchasing and consumption behaviours prior to implementation of the mandatory kcal labelling policy in England., Methods: From August-December 2021, large OHFS businesses subject to the kcal labelling regulations were visited prior to regulations coming into force on 6th April 2022. 3308 customers were recruited from 330 outlets and collected survey information on the number of kcal purchased and consumed by customers, customers' knowledge of the kcal content of their purchases, and customers noticing and use of kcal labelling. In a subset of 117 outlets, data was collected on nine recommended kcal labelling practices., Results: The average number of kcals purchased (1013 kcal, SD = 632 kcal) was high with 69% of purchases exceeding the recommendation of a maximum of 600 kcal per meal. Participants underestimated the energy content of their purchased meals by on average 253 kcal (SD = 644 kcals). In outlets providing kcal labelling in which customer survey data was collected, a minority of customers reported noticing (21%) or using (20%) kcal labelling. Out of the 117 outlets assessed for kcal labelling practices, 24 (21%) provided any in-store kcal labelling. None of the outlets met all nine aspects of recommended labelling practices., Conclusions: Prior to implementation of 2022 kcal labelling policy, the majority of sampled OHFS large business outlets in England did not provide kcal labelling. Few customers noticed or used the labels and on average customers purchased and consumed substantially more energy than recommended in public health guidelines. The findings suggest that reliance on voluntary action for kcal labelling implementation failed to produce widespread, consistent, and adequate kcal labelling practices., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objectives. We explored the effect of a culturally targeted calorie label intervention on food purchasing behavior of elementary school students. Method. We used a quasi-experimental design with two intervention schools and one control school to assess food purchases of third through fifth graders at standardized school food sales before and after the intervention (immediate and delayed) in schools. The intervention comprised three 1-hour assembly-style hip-hop–themed multimedia classes. Results. A mean total of 225 children participated in two baseline preintervention sales with and without calorie labels; 149 children participated in immediate postintervention food sales, while 133 children participated in the delayed sales. No significant change in purchased calories was observed in response to labels alone before the intervention. However, a mean decline in purchased calories of 20% (p < .01) and unhealthy foods (p < .01) was seen in immediately following the intervention compared to baseline purchases, and this persisted without significant decay after 7 days and 12 days. Conclusion. A 3-hour culturally targeted calorie label intervention may improve food-purchasing behavior of children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are one of the largest added sugar sources to diets in the UK and USA. Health warning labels reduce hypothetical selection of SSBs in online studies but uncertainty surrounds their impact on selection of drinks for consumption. Calorie information labels are also promising but their impact on SSB selection is unclear. This laboratory study assessed the impact on SSB selection of 'on-pack' labels placed directly on physical products: i.a pictorial health warning label depicting an adverse health consequence of excess sugar consumption; and ii.calorie information labels. Potential moderation of any effects by socio-economic position (SEP) was also examined. Participants - 401 adults, resident in England, approximately half of whom were of lower SEP and half of higher SEP, were asked to select a drink from a range of two non-SSBs and four SSBs (subsequent to completing a separate study assessing the effects of food availability on snack selection). The drinks included 'on-pack' labels according to randomisation: Group 1: pictorial health warning label on SSBs; Group 2: calorie information label on all drinks; Group 3: no additional label. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants selecting an SSB. Compared to not having additional labels (39%), neither the pictorial health warning label (40%) nor calorie information labels (43%) affected the proportion of participants selecting an SSB. Lower SEP participants (45%) were more likely to select an SSB compared to those of higher SEP (35%), but SEP did not moderate the impact of labels on drink selection. In conclusion, pictorial health warning labels may be less effective in reducing SSB selection in lab-based compared with online settings, or depending on label design and placement. Findings suggest that effects might be absent when choosing from real products with actual 'on-pack' labels, positioned in a 'realistic' manner. Field studies are needed to further assess the impact of 'on-pack' SSB warning labels in real-world settings to rule out the possible contribution of study design factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are one of the largest added sugar sources to diets in the UK and USA, particularly among young people. Warning labels, including calorie information labels, could reduce SSB consumption but uncertainty surrounds the labels that are most effective. This study assessed the impact of labels containing (a) each of two image-based warnings and (b) calorie information, singly and together, on SSB selection by parents of 11-16-year-olds living in the UK. Using a 3 (disease image, sugar content image, no image) × 2 (calorie information, no calorie information) between-subjects experimental design, 2002 participants were randomised to see beverages with one of six labels and selected one for their child to consume. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants selecting an SSB. Data were collected in December 2017. Logistic regressions showed SSB selection was lower when labels contained an image-based warning (35%), compared to not having any label (49%) or just calorie information (43.5%). The disease image lowered selection more than the sugar image (32% vs 40.5%). Providing calorie information with the disease image had no additional impact on selection (33%) but enhanced the impact of the sugar image (36%). Image-based warning labels discourage SSB selection by parents for their children. Images depicting health consequences of excess sugar consumption have larger effects than those depicting sugar content. Calorie information does not add to the effect of the former but does to that of the latter. Field studies are needed to assess the impact of SSB warning labels in real-life settings.

Objectives: We explored the effect of a culturally targeted calorie label intervention on food purchasing behavior of elementary school students., Method: We used a quasi-experimental design with two intervention schools and one control school to assess food purchases of third through fifth graders at standardized school food sales before and after the intervention (immediate and delayed) in schools. The intervention comprised three 1-hour assembly-style hip-hop-themed multimedia classes., Results: A mean total of 225 children participated in two baseline preintervention sales with and without calorie labels; 149 children participated in immediate postintervention food sales, while 133 children participated in the delayed sales. No significant change in purchased calories was observed in response to labels alone before the intervention. However, a mean decline in purchased calories of 20% (p < .01) and unhealthy foods (p < .01) was seen in immediately following the intervention compared to baseline purchases, and this persisted without significant decay after 7 days and 12 days., Conclusion: A 3-hour culturally targeted calorie label intervention may improve food-purchasing behavior of children., (© 2015 Society for Public Health Education.)