Guiding stars: the effect of a nutrition navigation program on consumer purchases at the supermarket

Improving consumer understanding of pesticide toxicity labels: experimental evidence

Consumers often inadvertently misperceive the health hazards associated with over-the-counter pesticides under the current textual labeling policy, potentially leading to improper use. We conducted an incentivized framed field experiment with eye tracking to evaluate the effectiveness of the current pesticide labels that convey risk using signal words (Caution, Warning, Danger) compared to two visually focused label alternatives: traffic light colors and skull intensity symbols. A total of 166 participants were randomly assigned to one of three label formats and asked to rank toxicity levels and make purchasing decisions within multiple price lists. Results show that signal words fail to adequately communicate toxicity levels. Specifically, participants' correct assessment of toxicity level dramatically improves from 54% under the existing signal word label to 95% under the traffic light and 83% under the skull intensity symbol labels. We also find that participants are more likely to choose the less toxic alternatives under the new labels, suggesting the current labeling system may affect choice and have unintended adverse effects on human health.

Comparing the impact of simple and educational point-of-decision messages on nutritional choice outcomes

Emerging evidence suggests that point-of-decision messages may be an effective way to promote healthy food choices. Previous studies show improvements in overall nutritional quality, as well as increases in underconsumed food categories, such as fruits and vegetables, and underconsumed nutrients of public health concern, like dietary fiber. However, there have been multiple approaches used for delivering point-of-decision messages, including very brief messages that remind individuals to consider health during choice, as well as longer messages providing educational information about health benefits. While both approaches have demonstrated positive impacts on outcomes, there is no comparative evidence of the messages' effectiveness. In this study, we examine the impact of four messages on two nutritional attributes of cereals selected in a two-round pre- and post-message breakfast cereal choice exercise with numerous (n = 33) breakfast cereals available. Data were collected via an online survey of adult US residents recruited from the Prolific consumer panel. Three of the messages were simple reminder messages (taste, health, fiber), while there was additionally a longer fiber-focused messaging detailing the health benefits of fiber. Findings show that the simple messages outperformed the longer educational message, though there were some trade-offs between general health and fiber messages. The simple dietary fiber-focused message resulted in significantly higher dietary fiber content in cereals chosen than in any other messaging condition, while the general health message did not result in significantly higher measures of nutritional quality than the simple fiber message. The results of the study suggest that simpler messages may be more effective at increasing the nutritional quality of food choices. Additionally, messages focused on specific nutrients lead to significantly greater increases in the content of those nutrients.

Promoting healthful food purchases through in-store interventions: Empirical evidence from rural food deserts

Effective ways to promote healthful food intake in rural areas are understudied. The paper evaluated whether a two-component, in-store intervention designed to encourage healthy food purchases was associated with improved healthfulness scores of food items purchased by shoppers in rural food deserts. One component introduced a point-of-sales label that assigned a single numerical score to each food item facilitating direct comparisons of the product's nutrition with those of other products shelved around it. The other component was a one-day nutrition education workshop promoted within the store. Interventions took place in 2015 at two stores in rural counties in the U.S. Midwest. Four stores in similar communities were selected as the control group. We applied a difference-in-difference model to estimate changes in the healthfulness of food items purchased attributable to the intervention among shoppers at the treatment stores (n = 486) and control stores (n = 10,759) using store transaction data. Healthfulness of food items was measured in terms of food scores published by the Environmental Working Group on a 1-10 scale. Both components had minimal impacts on the scores, although 0.2 and 0.1 points increases in the score per item and score per dollar were statistically significant at the 1% level respectively. A year after the intervention, these small effects of the intervention further diminished compared to the immediately after implementation. Results suggest the average effects of intervention across the study communities had limited practical significance but benefited some rural residents who were exposed to the intervention.

Trends (2014-2018) in the healthiness of packaged food purchases of Australian consumers before and after the introduction of voluntary Health Star Rating nutrition labels

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the trends in the healthiness of packaged food purchases of Australian consumers before and after the introduction of the Health Star Rating (HSR) nutrition labels.

DESIGN

Panel data analysis and difference-in-differences analysis.

SETTING

The Australian Government endorsed HSR nutrition labels for voluntary implementation on packaged foods in June 2014. We analyse the packaged food purchases of households across all major supermarkets before (January 2014 to June 2014) and after (June 2014-Dec 2018) the introduction of HSR.

PARTICIPANTS

6284 members of a panel of households across Australia reporting their grocery purchases to a market research company (Nielsen Homescan panel).

RESULTS

The healthiness of household food purchases exhibited a U-shaped trend - decreasing from 2014 to 2017, and then increasing from 2018, corresponding to the time when a higher proportion of products were HSR-labelled. Households that purchased a higher proportion of HSR-labelled products had healthier household purchases overall. Further, the healthiness of households' category-specific food purchases was positively associated with the proportion of HSR-labelled products in categories where HSR was adopted, relative to control categories where HSR was not adopted.

CONCLUSIONS

In Australia, once a substantial number of packaged food products adopted the voluntary HSR summary indicator, we observed an increasing trend in the healthiness of household food purchases. Widespread adoption of a nutrition summary indicator, such as HSR, on packaged food is likely to be beneficial for population health.

Nutri-Score 2023 update

In 2023, the algorithm underlying the Nutri-Score front-of-pack label was updated to better align with food-based dietary guidelines (FBDGs) across countries engaged in the system. On the basis of a comparison of FBDGs and literature reviews with the current Nutri-Score classification, modification scenarios were developed and tested in nutritional composition databases of branded products in four countries. The updated Nutri-Score nutrient profile model allows a better discrimination between products, in closer alignment with FBDGs, while the updated algorithm adopts a stricter approach for products that are high in components of concern (including non-nutritive sweeteners) and low in favourable dietary components. The updated Nutri-Score algorithm increases the alignment between the front-of-pack label system and FBDGs, strengthening its potential as a complementary public health tool in an international perspective.

The gamification of nutrition labels to encourage healthier food selection in online grocery shopping: A randomized controlled trial

Food purchase choices, one of the main determinants of food consumption, is highly influenced by food environments. Given the surge in online grocery shopping because of the COVID-19 pandemic, interventions in digital environments present more than ever an opportunity to improve the nutritional quality of food purchase choices. One such opportunity can be found in gamification. Participants (n = 1228) shopped for 12 items from a shopping list on a simulated online grocery platform. We randomized them into four groups in a 2 × 2 factorial design: presence vs. absence of gamification, and high vs. low budget. Participants in the gamification groups saw foods with 1 (least nutritious) to 5 (most nutritious) crown icons and a scoreboard with a tally of the number of crowns the participant collected. We estimated ordinary least squares and Poisson regression models to test the impact of the gamification and budget on the nutritional quality of the shopping basket. In the absence of gamification and low budget, participants collected 30.78 (95% CI [30.27; 31.29]) crowns. In the gamification and low budget condition, participants increased the nutritional quality of their shopping basket by collecting more crowns (B = 4.15, 95% CI [3.55; 4.75], p < 0.001). The budget amount ($50 vs. $30) did not alter the final shopping basket (B = 0.45, 95% CI [-0.02; 1.18], p = 0.057), nor moderated the gamification effect. Gamification increased the nutritional quality of the final shopping baskets and nine of 12 shopping list items in this hypothetical experiment. Gamifying nutrition labels may be an effective strategy to improve the nutritional quality of food choices in online grocery stores, but further research is needed.

Encouraging Healthier Food and Beverage Purchasing and Consumption: A Review of Interventions within Grocery Retail Settings

This review identifies the most promising intervention strategies for promoting the purchase and consumption of healthier items within U.S. grocery retail settings, with a particular focus on those strategies that may be most effective when implemented within SNAP-authorized retail settings. Searches of nine electronic databases, as well as forward and backward searches, yielded 1942 studies. After being screened, 73 peer-reviewed academic articles were identified for inclusion. Of these, 33 analyzed single-component interventions, while 40 assessed multi-component interventions. The following unique intervention types were considered as evaluated in these studies for their ability to increase healthy item purchasing and consumption: (1) nutrition scoring, (2) nutritional messaging, (3) non-nutritional messaging, (4) endcaps and secondary placement, (5) point-of-sale interventions, (6) increased stocking, (7) food tasting and demonstrations, (8) nutrition education, and (9) placement on shelf interventions. Nutritional scoring and nutritional messaging emerged as the most rigorously tested and effective intervention strategies. Other strategies warrant more research attention. Simple intervention strategies, as opposed to complex ones, yield the most successful results and minimize shopper burden. Therefore, these strategies should be reviewed for policy implementation within SNAP-authorized grocery retailers.

Change in the Healthiness of Foods Sold in an Australian Supermarket Chain Following Implementation of a Shelf Tag Intervention Based on the Health Star Rating System

Introduction: Most people in Australia buy most of their food in supermarkets. Marketing techniques promoting healthy foods in supermarkets can be important to encourage healthy eating at a population level. Shelf tags that highlight the healthiness of products have been identified as one such promising initiative. The aim of this study was to assess changes in the healthiness of foods sold in an Australian supermarket chain following implementation of a shelf tag intervention based on the Australian Health Star Rating (HSR) system. Methods: A controlled, non-randomised trial was undertaken in seven supermarkets (intervention: n = 3; control: n = 4) of a single chain in Victoria, Australia, over 12 weeks (4 weeks baseline, 8 weeks intervention period) between August and November 2015. The intervention involved provision of a shelf tag indicating the HSR of all packaged products that scored 4.5 or 5 stars (‘high-HSR products’) using the Australian HSR system. Posters indicating the healthiness of fresh fruits and vegetables (not eligible for an HSR rating, as they are not packaged) were also installed. Weekly per store sales data were provided by the retailer. In an intention-to-treat analysis (with intervention status of individual products based on their eligibility to be tagged), the proportion (%) of all ‘high-HSR’ packaged food sold and the volume of key nutrients (saturated fat, total fat, sodium, total sugar, protein, carbohydrates and energy) per 100 g sold were assessed. Difference-in-difference analyses were conducted to determine the difference between intervention and control stores in terms of mean outcomes between baseline and intervention periods. Customer exit surveys (n = 304) were conducted to evaluate awareness and use of the shelf tags and posters. Results: The proportion of ‘high-HSR products’ sold increased in the intervention period compared to the baseline period in each of the three intervention stores (average increase of 0.49%, 95% CI: −0.02, 0.99), compared to a decrease of −0.15% (−0.46, 0.15) in control stores (p = 0.034). The overall increase in intervention compared to control stores (difference-in-difference) of 0.64% represents an 8.2% increase in the sales of ‘high-HSR products’. Sales of total sugar, total fat, saturated fat, carbohydrates, sodium, protein and total energy in packaged food all decreased significantly more in intervention stores compared to control stores. Sales of fresh fruits and vegetables decreased in intervention stores compared to control stores. Customer surveys found that 34.4% noticed the shelf tags. Of those who noticed the tags, 58% believed the shelf tags influenced their purchases. Conclusions: With this study, we found that the use of shelf tags that highlight the healthiest packaged foods in a supermarket setting showed promise as a mechanism to improve the healthiness of purchases. Opportunities to scale up the intervention warrant exploration, with further research needed to assess the potential impact of the intervention on overall population diets over the longer term.

Cost-Benefit and Cost-Utility Analyses to Demonstrate the Potential Value-for-Money of Supermarket Shelf Tags Promoting Healthier Packaged Products in Australia

The supermarket environment impacts the healthiness of food purchased and consumed. Shelf tags that alert customers to healthier packaged products can improve the healthiness of overall purchases. This study assessed the potential value-for-money of implementing a three-year shelf tag intervention across all major supermarket chains in Australia. Cost-benefit analyses (CBA) and cost-utility analyses (CUA) were conducted based on results of a 12-week non-randomised controlled trial of a shelf tag intervention in seven Australian supermarkets. The change in energy density of all packaged foods purchased during the trial was used to estimate population-level changes in mean daily energy intake. A multi-state, multiple-cohort Markov model estimated the subsequent obesity-related health and healthcare cost outcomes over the lifetime of the 2019 Australian population. The CBA and CUA took societal and healthcare sector perspectives, respectively. The intervention was estimated to produce a mean reduction in population body weight of 1.09 kg. The net present value of the intervention was approximately AUD 17 billion (B). Over 98% of the intervention costs were borne by supermarkets. CUA findings were consistent with the CBA-the intervention was dominant, producing both health benefits and cost-savings. Shelf tags are likely to offer excellent value-for-money from societal and healthcare sector perspectives.

Are nudging and pricing strategies on food purchasing behaviors equally effective for all? Secondary analyses from the Supreme Nudge virtual supermarket study

Nudging and pricing strategies are effective in promoting healthier purchases. However, whether the effects are equal across individuals with different personal characteristics is unknown. This exploratory study aimed to examine differential effects of nudging and pricing strategies on food purchases across individuals' levels of impulsivity, price sensitivity, decision-making styles, and food choice motives. Data from a virtual supermarket experiment where participants were exposed to five study conditions (control, nudging, pricing, salient pricing, and salient pricing with nudging) was used. Participants completed questionnaires assessing their impulsivity, price sensitivity, decision-making styles, and food choice motives. The outcome was the percentage of healthy food purchases. Effect modification was analyzed by adding interaction terms to the statistical models and post-hoc probing was conducted for statistically significant interaction terms. We used data from 400 Dutch adult participants (61.3% female, median age 30.0 years (IQR 24.0)). The effects of the nudging and pricing conditions on healthy food purchases were not modified by impulsivity, price sensitivity, decision-making styles, and the food choice motives 'health' and 'price'. Only the interactions of the food choice motive 'natural content of foods' x pricing (B = -1.02, 90%CI = -2.04; -0.01), the food choice motive 'weight control' x nudging (B = -2.15, 90%CI = -3.34; -0.95), and 'weight control' x pricing (B = -1.87, 90%CI = -3.11; -0.62) were statistically significant. Post-hoc probing indicated that nudging and/or pricing strategies were more effective in individuals who gave lower priority to these food choice motives. The effects of nudging and pricing strategies on increasing healthy food purchasing behaviors, at least in a virtual environment, do not seem to be influenced by personal characteristics and may therefore be implemented as general health promoting strategies.

Point-of-sale nutrition information interventions in food retail stores to promote healthier food purchase and intake: A systematic review

Providing simple information that identifies healthier/less healthy products at the point-of-sale has been increasingly recognized as a potential strategy for improving population diet. This review evaluated the effect on healthiness of food purchasing/intake of interventions that identify specific products as healthier/less healthy at the point-of-sale in food retail settings. Five databases were searched for peer-reviewed randomized controlled or quasi-experimental trials published 2000-2020. Effects on primary outcomes of the 26 eligible studies (322 stores and 19,002 participants) were positive (n = 14), promising (effective under certain conditions; n = 3), mixed (different effect across treatment arms/outcomes; n = 4), null (n = 3), negative (n = 1), or unclear (n = 1). Shelf-label studies (three studies of two rating systems across all products) were positive. Technology-delivered (mobile applications/podcast/kiosk) interventions were positive (n = 3/5) or promising/mixed (n = 2/5). In-store displays (n = 16) had mixed effectiveness. Interventions provided information on targeted healthier products only (n = 17), unhealthy products only (n = 1), both healthy and unhealthy (n = 2), and across all products (n = 5). No patterns were found between behavior change technique used and effectiveness. Study quality was mixed. These findings indicate that point-of-sale interventions identifying healthy/unhealthy options can lead to healthier customer purchasing behavior, particularly those delivered using shelf-labels or technology. Further research on discouraging unhealthy foods is needed.

The Influence of Front-of-Package Nutrition Labeling on Consumer Behavior and Product Reformulation

Countries worldwide have implemented mandatory or voluntary front-of-package nutrition labeling systems. We provide a narrative review of (a) real-world evaluations of front-of-package nutrition labels that analyze objective sales data and (b) studies that objectively assess product reformulation in response to a front-of-package nutrition label implementation. We argue that there is sufficient scientific evidence to recommend that governments implement mandatory front-of-package nutrition labeling systems to improve population health. We also present a conceptual framework to describe front-of-package label influence and provide recommendations for the optimal label design, emphasizing that labeling systems should be highly visible and salient, be simple and easy to understand, leverage automatic associations, and integrate informational and emotional messaging. The existing research suggests that Guideline Daily Amount labels should be avoided and that the Health Star Rating and Nutri-Score systems are promising but that systems with warning labels like the one in Chile are likely to produce the largest public health benefits. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Nutrition, Volume 41 is September 2021. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

The effect of on-shelf sugar labeling on beverage sales in the supermarket: a comparative interrupted time series analysis of a natural experiment

BACKGROUND

Nutrition labels show potential in increasing healthy food and beverage purchases, but their effectiveness seems to depend on the type of label, the targeted food category and the setting, and evidence on their impact in real-world settings is limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of an industry-designed on-shelf sugar label on the sales of beverages with no, low, medium and high sugar content implemented within a real-world supermarket.

METHODS

In week 17 of 2019, on-shelf sugar labels were implemented by a Dutch supermarket chain. Non-alcoholic beverages were classified using a traffic-light labeling system and included the beverage categories "green" for sugar free (< 1.25 g/250 ml), "blue" for low sugar (1.25-6.24 g/250 ml), "yellow" for medium sugar (6.25-13.5 g/250 ml) and "amber" for high sugar (> 13.5 g/250 ml). Store-level data on beverage sales and revenue from 41 randomly selected supermarkets for 13 weeks pre-implementation and 21 weeks post-implementation were used for analysis. In total, 30 stores implemented the on-shelf sugar labels by week 17, and the 11 stores that had not were used as comparisons. Outcome measures were differences in the number of beverages sold in the four label categories and the total revenue from beverage sales in implementation stores relative to comparison stores. Analyses were conducted using a multiple-group Interrupted Time Series Approach. Results of individual store data were combined using random effect meta-analyses.

RESULTS

At the end of the intervention period, the changes in sales of beverages with green (B 3.4, 95%CI -0.3; 7.0), blue (B 0.0, 95%CI -0.6; 0.7), yellow (B 1.3, 95%CI -0.9; 3.5), and amber (B 0.9, 95%CI -5.5; 7.3) labels were not significantly different between intervention and comparison stores. The changes in total revenues for beverages at the end of the intervention period were also not significantly different between intervention and comparison stores.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of an on-shelf sugar labeling system did not significantly decrease unhealthy beverage sales or significantly increase healthier beverage sales. Nutrition labeling initiatives combined with complementary strategies, such as pricing strategies or other healthy food nudging approaches, should be considered to promote healthier beverage purchases.

‘To LED or Not to LED?’: Using Color Priming for Influencing Consumers’ Preferences of Light Bulbs

Recently, we have seen energy-efficient light-emitting diode (LED) light bulbs rapidly replace incandescent ones. However, results of new research are indicative of adverse health impacts of LED lighting, which is characterized by enriched blue light. Our study aims to reveal whether using color priming by attaching red/green traffic-light icons on light bulbs influences consumers’ preferences of light bulbs. We conducted a field study simulating the buying process, in which participants (N = 572) were presented with LED and carbon incandescent bulbs. We alternately displayed two pairs of bulbs: (1) in their original packaging and (2) in packages marked with traffic light icons (red = LED). Our results confirm that traffic light icons significantly (p < 0.01) increase the odds of choosing the healthier carbon bulb. The results highlight the benefits of attaching traffic light icons to light bulb packaging, helping consumers to make more health-conscientious purchasing decisions. Nowadays, this study’s contribution is more significant due to COVID-19 restrictions and stay-at-home policies, since people work or study remotely, which increases their exposure to household lighting. These results may incentivize policymakers to enforce adding traffic light icons to light bulb packaging, thus encouraging LED light bulb manufacturers to reduce the blue light component in order to improve the health aspect of their bulbs.

The healthy food marketing strategies study: design, baseline characteristics, and supermarket compliance

Identifying effective strategies to promote healthy eating and reduce obesity is a priority in the USA, especially among low-income and minority groups, who often have less access to healthy food and higher rates of obesity. Efforts to improve food access have led to more supermarkets in low-income, ethnically diverse neighborhoods. However, this alone may not be enough to reduce food insecurity and improve residents' diet quality and health. This paper summarizes the design, methods, baseline findings, and supermarket in-store marketing strategy compliance for a randomized trial of the impact of healthy food marketing on the purchase of healthier "target" food items. Thirty-three supermarkets in low-income, high-minority neighborhoods in the metropolitan Philadelphia area were matched on store size and percentage of sales from government food assistance programs and randomly assigned to the intervention or control group. Healthy marketing strategies, including increased availability of healthier "target" products, prime shelf-placement and call-out promotion signs, and reduced availability of regular "comparison" products, were implemented in 16 intervention stores for an 18 month period for over 100 individual food items. Six product categories were studied: bread, checkout cooler beverages, cheese, frozen dinners, milk, and salty snacks. The primary outcome measure was weekly sales per store in each product category for 1 year preintervention and 18 months during the intervention. Compliance with the marketing strategies was assessed twice per month for the first 6 months and once a month thereafter. Store and neighborhood characteristics were not significantly different between control and intervention stores. Intercept surveys with customers to assess shopping habits and grocery marketing environment assessments to examine the food promotion environment were completed in the same six food categories. In intercept surveys, 51.0% of shoppers self-identified as overweight and 60.6% wanted to change their weight. Shoppers who typically purchased one type of food over another commonly did so out of habit or because the item was on sale. Findings revealed that preintervention sales of healthier "target" or regular "comparison" items did not differ between intervention and control stores for 1 year prior to intervention implementation. Rates of compliance with the healthy marketing strategies were high, averaging 76.5% over the first 12 months in all 16 stores. If healthy in-store marketing interventions are effective in this scaled-up, longer-term study, they should be translated into wider use in community supermarkets.

Systematic Review on International Salt Reduction Policy in Restaurants

As the catering sector has increasingly contributed to population-level salt intake, many countries have begun developing salt-reduction strategies for restaurants. This paper aims to provide an overview of global salt reduction policies in restaurants. Scientific papers and website materials were systematically searched from Web of Science, Science Direct, and PubMed, as well as official websites of government departments and organizations. A total of 78 full-text papers and grey literature works were included. From 58 countries and regions, 62 independent policies were identified, 27 of which were mandatory (3 with fines). The most common strategy was menu labeling, which was a component of 40 policies. Target setting (n = 23) and reformulation (n = 13) of dishes were also widely implemented. Other salt-reduction strategies included education campaign, chef training, toolkits delivery, table salt removal, media campaign, and government assistance such as free nutrition analysis and toolkits distribution. Most policies focused on chain restaurants. Evaluations of these policies were limited and showed inconsistent results, and more time is needed to demonstrate the clear long-term effects. Attention has been paid to salt reduction in restaurants around the world but is still at its early stage. The feasibility and effectiveness of the strategies need to be further explored.

Retail Nutrition Programs and Outcomes: An Evidence Analysis Center Scoping Review

As nutrition-related diseases contribute to rising health care costs, food retail settings are providing a unique opportunity for registered dietitian nutritionists (RDNs) to address the nutritional needs of consumers. Food as Medicine interventions play a role in preventing and/or managing many chronic conditions that drive health care costs. The objective of this scoping review was to identify and characterize literature examining Food as Medicine interventions within food retail settings and across consumer demographics. An electronic literature search of 8 databases identified 11,404 relevant articles. Results from the searches were screened against inclusion criteria, and intervention effectiveness was assessed for the following outcomes: improvement in health outcomes and cost-effectiveness. One-hundred and eighty-six papers and 25 systematic reviews met inclusion criteria. Five categories surfaced as single interventions: prescription programs, incentive programs, medically tailored nutrition, path-to-purchase marketing, and personalized nutrition education. Multiple combinations of intervention categories, reporting of health outcomes (nutritional quality of shopping purchases, eating habits, biometric measures), and cost-effectiveness (store sales, health care dollar savings) also emerged. The intervention categories that produced both improved health outcomes and cost-effectiveness included a combination of incentive programs, personalized nutrition education, and path-to-purchase marketing. Food as Medicine interventions in the food retail setting can aid consumers in navigating health through diet and nutrition by encompassing the following strategic focus areas: promotion of health and well-being, managing chronic disease, and improving food security. Food retailers should consider the target population and desired focus areas and should engage registered dietitian nutritionists when developing Food as Medicine interventions.

Improving Consumption and Purchases of Healthier Foods in Retail Environments: A Systematic Review

This review examines current research on manipulations of U.S. food retail environments to promote healthier food purchasing and consumption. Studies reviewed use marketing strategies defined as the 4Ps (product, price, placement, promotion) to examine results based on single- and multi-component interventions by study design, outcome, and which of the “Ps” was targeted. Nine electronic databases were searched for publications from 2010 to 2019, followed by forward and backward searches. Studies were included if the intervention was initiated by a researcher or retailer, conducted in-store, and manipulated the retail environment. Of the unique 596 studies initially identified, 64 studies met inclusion criteria. Findings show that 56 studies had at least one positive effect related to healthier food consumption or purchasing. Thirty studies used single-component interventions, while 34 were multi-component. Promotion was the most commonly utilized marketing strategy, while manipulating promotion, placement, and product was the most common for multi-component interventions. Only 14 of the 64 studies were experimental and included objective outcome data. Future research should emphasize rigorous designs and objective outcomes. Research is also needed to understand individual and additive effects of multi-component interventions on sales outcomes, substitution effects of healthy food purchases, and sustainability of impacts.

The impact of the Nutri-Score nutrition label on perceived healthiness and purchase intentions

Making healthier food choices easier at the time of purchase is a challenge for public policy makers. The Nutri-Score can be an effective tool for guiding and steering consumers toward more informed, healthier purchasing decisions. This research investigates the impact of the presence of the Nutri-Score and its five categories on consumers' perceived healthiness perceptions and purchase intentions. Consumers in the EU took part in two online experiments, in which they rated products from different categories, with or without Nutri-Scores, in terms of their perceived healthiness and purchase intentions. The presence of the Nutri-Score enabled respondents to assess the healthiness of products better; furthermore, it offers the potential to boost sales of healthy products, without affecting sales of unhealthy products. Perceived healthiness mediates the relationship between Nutri-Score categories and purchase intentions, and focusing on the healthiness of products can give producers a competitive advantage, regardless of whether it is a manufacturer brand or a private label. These findings offer actionable insights for public policy makers and manufacturers; they also suggest the need to embrace the Nutri-Score as the standard front-of-pack label to help fight the increasing obesity pandemic.

The effects of nudges on purchases, food choice, and energy intake or content of purchases in real-life food purchasing environments: a systematic review and evidence synthesis

Background

Adults with a low socioeconomic position (SEP) are more likely to engage in unhealthy diets as compared to adults with high SEP. However, individual-level educational interventions aiming to improve food choices have shown limited effectiveness in adults with low SEP. Environmental-level interventions such as nudging strategies however, may be more likely to benefit low SEP groups. We aimed to review the evidence for the effectiveness of nudges as classified according to interventions in proximal physical micro-environments typology (TIPPME) to promote healthy purchases, food choice, or affecting energy intake or content of purchases, within real-life food purchasing environments. Second, we aimed to investigate the potentially moderating role of SEP.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, and PsycINFO until 31 January 2018. Studies were considered eligible for inclusion when they i) complied with TIPPME intervention definitions; ii) studied actual purchases, food choice, or energy intake or content of purchases, iii) and were situated in real-life food purchasing environments. Risk of bias was assessed using a quality assessment tool and evidence was synthesized using harvest plots.

Results

From the 9210 references identified, 75 studies were included. Studies were generally of weak to moderate quality. The most frequently studied nudges were information (56%), mixed (24%), and position nudges (13%). Harvest plots showed modest tendencies towards beneficial effects on outcomes for information and position nudges. Less evidence was available for other TIPPME nudging interventions for which the harvest plots did not show compelling patterns. Only six studies evaluated the effects of nudges across levels of SEP (e.g., educational level, food security status, job type). Although there were some indications that nudges were more effective in low SEP groups, the limited amount of evidence and different proxies of SEP used warrant caution in the interpretation of findings.

Conclusions

Information and position nudges may contribute to improving population dietary behaviours. Evidence investigating the moderating role of SEP was limited, although some studies reported greater effects in low SEP subgroups. We conclude that more high-quality studies obtaining detailed data on participant’s SEP are needed.

Registration

This systematic review is registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42018086983).

Low-Income Parents' Use of Front-of-Package Nutrition Labels in a Virtual Supermarket

OBJECTIVE

To examine the impact front-of-package nutrition labels (FOPLs) have on decision-making abilities among low-income parents in a virtual supermarket.

DESIGN

A 4-by-2 experimental design with 3 FOPLs (summary, nutrient-specific, hybrid) and a no-FOPL comparison. Within the FOPL condition, participants either shopped with a time limit (10 minutes) or with no time limit.

SETTING

A web-based, 3-dimensional virtual supermarket.

PARTICIPANTS

Parents (n = 1,452) from low-income households with at least 1 child aged 4-12 years.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURED

Index derived from the United Kingdom's Nutrient Profiling Model that summarized the overall nutrient profile of the participant's shopping basket.

ANALYSIS

Analysis of covariance with post hoc estimations (pairwise) of condition means adjusted for multiple comparisons.

RESULTS

All FOPLs led to healthier nutrient profiles than the no-FOPL condition (P < .001). Simple FOPLs (ie, summary, hybrid) led to healthier nutrient profiles than nutrient-specific FOPLs (P = .02 and P < .001, respectively). Among parents exposed to simple FOPLs, those under time pressure made less healthy choices than those who were not under time pressure (P = .05 and P = .03, respectively). Time pressure did not affect parents exposed to nutrient-specific FOPLs (P = .69).

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Front-of-package nutrition labels can aid parents in selecting healthier products. Simple FOPLs provide greater utility for selecting healthier products than FOPLs that present an array of nutrient information. Time pressure can influence how parents interact with different types of label information.

Predicting obesity reduction after implementing warning labels in Mexico: A modeling study

BACKGROUND

In October 2019, Mexico approved a law to establish that nonalcoholic beverages and packaged foods that exceed a threshold for added calories, sugars, fats, trans fat, or sodium should have an "excess of" warning label. We aimed to estimate the expected reduction in the obesity prevalence and obesity costs in Mexico by introducing warning labels, over 5 years, among adults under 60 years of age.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Baseline intakes of beverages and snacks were obtained from the 2016 Mexican National Health and Nutrition Survey. The expected impact of labels on caloric intake was obtained from an experimental study, with a 10.5% caloric reduction for beverages and 3.0% caloric reduction for snacks. The caloric reduction was introduced into a dynamic model to estimate weight change. The model output was then used to estimate the expected changes in the prevalence of obesity and overweight. To predict obesity costs, we used the Health Ministry report of the impact of overweight and obesity in Mexico 1999-2023. We estimated a mean caloric reduction of 36.8 kcal/day/person (23.2 kcal/day from beverages and 13.6 kcal/day from snacks). Five years after implementation, this caloric reduction could reduce 1.68 kg and 4.98 percentage points (pp) in obesity (14.7%, with respect to baseline), which translates into a reduction of 1.3 million cases of obesity and a reduction of US$1.8 billion in direct and indirect costs. Our estimate is based on experimental evidence derived from warning labels as proposed in Canada, which include a single label and less restrictive limits to sugar, sodium, and saturated fats. Our estimates depend on various assumptions, such as the transportability of effect estimates from the experimental study to the Mexican population and that other factors that could influence weight and food and beverage consumption remain unchanged. Our results will need to be corroborated by future observational studies through the analysis of changes in sales, consumption, and body weight.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we estimated that warning labels may effectively reduce obesity and obesity-related costs. Mexico is following Chile, Peru, and Uruguay in implementing warning labels to processed foods, but other countries could benefit from this intervention.

Using natural experiments to improve public health evidence: a review of context and utility for obesity prevention

Background

Natural experiments are increasingly valued as a way to assess the health impact of health and non-health interventions when planned controlled experimental research designs may be infeasible or inappropriate to implement. This study sought to investigate the value of natural experiments by exploring how they have been used in practice. The study focused on obesity prevention research as one complex programme area for applying natural experiment studies.

Methods

A literature search sought obesity prevention research from January 1997 to December 2017 and identified 46 population health studies that self-described as a natural experiment.

Results

The majority of studies identified were published in the last 5 years, illustrating a more recent adoption of such opportunities. The majority of studies were evaluations of the impact of policies (n = 19), such as assessing changes to food labelling, food advertising or taxation on diet and obesity outcomes, or were built environment interventions (n = 17), such as the impact of built infrastructure on physical activity or access to healthy food. Research designs included quasi-experimental, pre-experimental and non-experimental methods. Few studies applied rigorous research designs to establish stronger causal inference, such as multiple pre/post measures, time series designs or comparison of change against an unexposed group. In general, researchers employed techniques to enhance the study utility but often were limited in the use of more rigorous study designs by ethical considerations and/or the particular context of the intervention.

Conclusion

Greater recognition of the utility and versatility of natural experiments in generating evidence for complex health issues like obesity prevention is needed. This review suggests that natural experiments may be underutilised as an approach for providing evidence of the effects of interventions, particularly for evaluating health outcomes of interventions when unexpected opportunities to gather evidence arise.

Consumers' food choices, understanding and perceptions in response to different front-of-pack nutrition labelling systems in Belgium: results from an online experimental study

Background

Front-of-pack nutrition labels (FoPLs) are increasingly implemented by governments internationally to support consumers to make healthier food choices. Although the Nutri-Score FOPL has officially been implemented in Belgium since April 2019, no study has been conducted before its implementation to compare the effectiveness of different FOPLs.

Methods

The aim of this study was to compare food choices, objective understanding and perceptions of Belgian consumers in response to five different FOPLs, currently implemented in different countries internationally, namely the Health Star Ratings (HSR), the Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL), Nutri-Score, Guideline Daily Amounts (GDA), and Warning symbols. During the summer 2019, 1007 Belgian consumers were recruited and randomized to one of the five different FOPLs. Through an online questionnaire they were asked to choose one of three different foods within each of three categories (pizzas, cakes, breakfast cereals), as well as rank those same three foods according to nutritional quality, in the condition without as well as with FOPL. In addition, various questions were asked on their perceptions in relation to the FOPL they were exposed to.

Results

Perceptions of consumers were favorable for all FOPLs with no significant differences between the different FOPLs. There were no significant differences in food choices among the different FOPLs, but Nutri-Score performed best for ranking food products according to nutritional quality.

Conclusions

While there were no significant differences among different FOPLs for food choices and perceptions, the Nutri-Score was the most effective FOPL in informing Belgian consumers of the nutritional quality of food products.

Does point-of-sale nutrition information improve the nutritional quality of food choices?

Point-of-sale nutrition information has been adopted by numerous grocery stores to respond to the demand for easy-to-understand nutrition labeling by consumers. Although there is conflicting evidence regarding the effectiveness of providing nutrition information, previous research indicates simplified shelf nutrition labels may lead to healthier choices. However, these studies have not examined how different consumer segments respond to these labels, nor the differential impacts across foods. Using household purchase data from a store that voluntarily adopted the (now defunct) NuVal shelf nutrition labels (a 1-100 numeric score derived from a nutrition-profiling algorithm), we assess NuVal impacts across different consumers and foods. NuVal scores potentially influence not only purchase quantity but also likelihood of buying. Thus, the effect of NuVal was measured by estimating a two-part model and predicting consumers' unconditional purchase responses. We found evidence of heterogeneous impacts of NuVal across consumers and foods. High-income households and households with children shifted their yogurt and frozen dinner purchases to more healthful items. In contrast, households with children and households headed by heads with college education slightly shifted their canned soup purchases to less healthful options. Our findings suggest that specific foods and consumer segments are influenced by simplified shelf nutrition information and further research is necessary to better understand its effect on consumer dietary quality.

A Systematic Review of the Effect of Retail Food Environment Interventions on Diet and Health with a Focus on the Enabling Role of Public Policies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Update the state of evidence on the effectiveness of retail food environment interventions in influencing diet and explore the underlying role of public policy, through a systematic review of population-level interventions to promote health in the retail food environment, including community and consumer environments. Diet-related outcomes included purchasing, dietary intakes, diet quality, and health including weight. We coded studies for enabling public policy levers underpinning the intervention, using two widely used conceptual frameworks.

RECENT FINDINGS

Of 86 articles (1974-2018), the majority (58 articles, 67%) showed at least one positive effect on diet. Thirteen articles (15%) discussed natural experiments, 27 articles (31%) used a design involving comparison groups including 23 articles (27%) specifically describing randomized controlled trials, and 46 (53%) were quasi-experimental (cross-sectional) evaluations. Across the "4Ps" of marketing (product, promotion, placement, and price), promotion comprised the greatest proportion of intervention strategies, especially in earlier literature (pre-2008). Few studies combined geographic access interventions with 4P strategies, and few used robust dietary intake assessments. Behavior change communication remains an intervention mainstay, but recent work has also incorporated environmental and social planning, and fiscal strategies. More recent interventions were multi-component. The retail food environment intervention literature continues to grow and has become more robust overall, with clearer evidence of the effect of interventions on diet-related outcomes, including consumer purchasing, dietary intakes, and health. There is still much scope for development in the field. Attention to enabling public policy could help to strengthen intervention implementation and evaluation in the retail food environment.

A review of nutrition labeling and food choice in the United States

A proliferation of processed food and labeling claims motivated the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act of 1990, which mandated the Nutrition Facts Label. Providing nutrition information is often put forth as a way to change food choice; however, despite efforts to provide dietary information using nutrition labeling, more than a third of the US has obesity and portions of the population continue to under consume vital nutrients. There has been progress beyond the Nutrition Facts Label in recent years with front-of-package labeling and menu labeling, which is crucial given changes in consumption trends for food-away-from-home. Additionally, changes were recently made to the Nutrition Facts Label due to lack of awareness, understanding, and ability to effectively improve diet quality. This paper explores the literature to track the evolution of knowledge about attention to nutrition information and how nutrition information affects dietary choices.

Shaping consumption propensity through the emotional response evoked by nutritional labels: Evidence from an fMRI study

The study aims to investigate a) the ability of nutritional labels in pictorial and textual form to guide consumption choices applying the dual-coding theory; b) the effectiveness of a new type of pictorial label (i.e. the body label) that appeals to the self-congruence theory and to positive emotional response. The research hypotheses were tested trough a 2x4x2 fMRI experimental design with 2 levels of product version (regular vs light), 4 levels of label type (text vs traffic light vs star rating vs body) and 2 levels of group of people (normal weight vs overweight). The body light label generates more brain activation in areas involved in the reward circuit compared to the body regular one, and compared to all the other types of labels for both versions, only in the overweight subject group. Furthermore, the star rating label has the worst performance in orienting healthy food choices as it requires more cognitive effort. The results are of interest to policy maker's strategies and to out-of-store and in-store communication strategies with the aim to contract the excessive body-weight phenomenon.

Consumers' Perceptions of Five Front-of-Package Nutrition Labels: An Experimental Study Across 12 Countries

Consumers’ perceptions of five front-of-pack nutrition label formats (health star rating (HSR), multiple traffic lights (MTL), Nutri-Score, reference intakes (RI) and warning label) were assessed across 12 countries (Argentina, Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Mexico, Singapore, Spain, the UK and the USA). Perceptions assessed included liking, trust, comprehensibility, salience and desire for the label to be mandatory. A sample of 12,015 respondents completed an online survey in which they rated one of the five (randomly allocated) front-of-pack labels (FoPLs) along the perception dimensions described above. Respondents viewing the MTL provided the most favourable ratings. Perceptions of the other FoPLs were mixed or neutral. No meaningful or consistent patterns were observed in the interactions between country and FoPL type, indicating that culture was not a strong predictor of general perceptions. The overall ranking of the FoPLs differed somewhat from previous research assessing their objective performance in terms of enhancing understanding of product healthiness, in which the Nutri-Score was the clear front-runner. Respondents showed a strong preference for mandatory labelling, regardless of label condition, which is consistent with past research showing that the application of labels across all products leads to healthier choices.

Nudging to get our food choices on a sustainable track

Food production is one of the major contributors to environmental damage. Adaptations in our food choices are needed to preserve resources for the needs of future generations. More sustainable consumption patterns have been encouraged by economic incentives, laws, education and communication campaigns. Nonetheless, consumers still find difficulties in trying to change their current food habits. This review takes a behavioural approach in encouraging sustainable food choices among consumers. From a nudging perspective, many behavioural changes can be encouraged in a non-obtrusive way by adapting the complex food environment in which consumers are operating. These interventions do not restrict consumers' choices but rather adapt the choice architecture wherein food decisions are made. Drawing on the literature from diverse theoretical perspectives, we provide an overview of the application of nudging for more sustainable food choices and highlight where more research is needed. More specifically, we discuss research that used nudging to engender cognitive impact (i.e. the use of labels or visibility enhancements), affective responses (i.e. sensorial and social influence cues) and behavioural effects (i.e. adjustments in convenience and product size). We conclude that this review only shows the tip of the iceberg of the research on nudging and sustainable consumption that is likely forthcoming in the next few years, following the successes of nudging applications in other domains. Nonetheless, each individual nudging intervention requires careful examination. Personal predispositions towards the environment should be considered when designing interventions, demonstrating the complementarity of nudging with education on sustainable consumption.

The effects of voluntary front-of-pack nutrition labels on volume shares of products: the case of the Dutch Choices

OBJECTIVE

The study examines the impact of a front-of-pack label (Dutch Choices) on household purchase patterns.

DESIGN

Change in households' volume share of products eligible for the label (treatment group) is estimated as a function of changes in the market share of products displaying the label (treatment), while controlling for other relevant factors.

SETTING

Home-scan data for five food categories, subdivided into eighteen food groups, for households participating in a Dutch consumer panel. The data are from the period 2005 to 2009, which includes the date of the introduction of the Choices label.

PARTICIPANTS

Between 831 and 7216 households from all over the Netherlands.

RESULTS

An increase in the market share of products displaying the label led to an increase in the volume share purchased of products eligible for the label for dairy products, yoghurts and for sauces. For some of the products, the partial effect is considerable (e.g. a 10 percentage point (pp) increase in the share of products displaying the label is associated with a 11·5 and 14·0 pp increase in the volume share of eligible products for chocolate milk and quark, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest a positive effect from the presence of the Choices label on the volume share of eligible products purchased. Provided that eligible products are healthier than non-eligible products, the Choices label is a good guide for consumers in order to help them make healthier food choices. The positive effect is found mainly in food groups with a mix of both healthy and unhealthy food products.

Front-of-Pack Labeling and the Nutritional Quality of Students' Food Purchases: A 3-Arm Randomized Controlled Trial

Objectives. To assess the effects of the Nutri-Score label (relative to the Reference Intakes label or no label) on the nutritional quality of students' food purchases. Methods. A 3-arm randomized controlled trial was conducted in France in 2017; 2907 participants were randomized into 1 of the 3 study arms (Nutri-Score, Reference Intakes, no label) and invited to purchase groceries from an experimental Web-based supermarket. The main outcome was the overall nutritional quality of purchases, measured according to a modified version of the Food Standards Agency Nutrient Profiling System (FSAm-NPS/HCSP) score. Results. The mean (±SD) FSAm-NPS/HCSP score was lower in the Nutri-Score group (2.02 ±3.56) than in the Reference Intakes group (2.69 ±3.44), reflecting higher nutritional quality; however, there was no significant difference between the Nutri-Score and no-label (2.45 ±3.28) groups or between the Reference Intakes and no-label groups. Shopping cart content was lower in calories and saturated fatty acids and higher in fruits and vegetables in the Nutri-Score arm than in the other arms. Conclusions. The Nutri-Score label appeared to improve the nutritional composition of students' food purchases relative to the Reference Intakes label or no label.

Environmental interventions to reduce the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages and their effects on health

BACKGROUND

Frequent consumption of excess amounts of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB) is a risk factor for obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and dental caries. Environmental interventions, i.e. interventions that alter the physical or social environment in which individuals make beverage choices, have been advocated as a means to reduce the consumption of SSB.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of environmental interventions (excluding taxation) on the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages and sugar-sweetened milk, diet-related anthropometric measures and health outcomes, and on any reported unintended consequences or adverse outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 11 general, specialist and regional databases from inception to 24 January 2018. We also searched trial registers, reference lists and citations, scanned websites of relevant organisations, and contacted study authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies on interventions implemented at an environmental level, reporting effects on direct or indirect measures of SSB intake, diet-related anthropometric measures and health outcomes, or any reported adverse outcome. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised controlled trials (NRCTs), controlled before-after (CBA) and interrupted-time-series (ITS) studies, implemented in real-world settings with a combined length of intervention and follow-up of at least 12 weeks and at least 20 individuals in each of the intervention and control groups. We excluded studies in which participants were administered SSB as part of clinical trials, and multicomponent interventions which did not report SSB-specific outcome data. We excluded studies on the taxation of SSB, as these are the subject of a separate Cochrane Review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed the risks of bias of included studies. We classified interventions according to the NOURISHING framework, and synthesised results narratively and conducted meta-analyses for two outcomes relating to two intervention types. We assessed our confidence in the certainty of effect estimates with the GRADE framework as very low, low, moderate or high, and presented 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 14,488 unique records, and assessed 1030 in full text for eligibility. We found 58 studies meeting our inclusion criteria, including 22 RCTs, 3 NRCTs, 14 CBA studies, and 19 ITS studies, with a total of 1,180,096 participants. The median length of follow-up was 10 months. The studies included children, teenagers and adults, and were implemented in a variety of settings, including schools, retailing and food service establishments. We judged most studies to be at high or unclear risk of bias in at least one domain, and most studies used non-randomised designs. The studies examine a broad range of interventions, and we present results for these separately.Labelling interventions (8 studies): We found moderate-certainty evidence that traffic-light labelling is associated with decreasing sales of SSBs, and low-certainty evidence that nutritional rating score labelling is associated with decreasing sales of SSBs. For menu-board calorie labelling reported effects on SSB sales varied.Nutrition standards in public institutions (16 studies): We found low-certainty evidence that reduced availability of SSBs in schools is associated with decreased SSB consumption. We found very low-certainty evidence that improved availability of drinking water in schools and school fruit programmes are associated with decreased SSB consumption. Reported associations between improved availability of drinking water in schools and student body weight varied.Economic tools (7 studies): We found moderate-certainty evidence that price increases on SSBs are associated with decreasing SSB sales. For price discounts on low-calorie beverages reported effects on SSB sales varied.Whole food supply interventions (3 studies): Reported associations between voluntary industry initiatives to improve the whole food supply and SSB sales varied.Retail and food service interventions (7 studies): We found low-certainty evidence that healthier default beverages in children's menus in chain restaurants are associated with decreasing SSB sales, and moderate-certainty evidence that in-store promotion of healthier beverages in supermarkets is associated with decreasing SSB sales. We found very low-certainty evidence that urban planning restrictions on new fast-food restaurants and restrictions on the number of stores selling SSBs in remote communities are associated with decreasing SSB sales. Reported associations between promotion of healthier beverages in vending machines and SSB intake or sales varied.Intersectoral approaches (8 studies): We found moderate-certainty evidence that government food benefit programmes with restrictions on purchasing SSBs are associated with decreased SSB intake. For unrestricted food benefit programmes reported effects varied. We found moderate-certainty evidence that multicomponent community campaigns focused on SSBs are associated with decreasing SSB sales. Reported associations between trade and investment liberalisation and SSB sales varied.Home-based interventions (7 studies): We found moderate-certainty evidence that improved availability of low-calorie beverages in the home environment is associated with decreased SSB intake, and high-certainty evidence that it is associated with decreased body weight among adolescents with overweight or obesity and a high baseline consumption of SSBs.Adverse outcomes reported by studies, which may occur in some circumstances, included negative effects on revenue, compensatory SSB consumption outside school when the availability of SSBs in schools is reduced, reduced milk intake, stakeholder discontent, and increased total energy content of grocery purchases with price discounts on low-calorie beverages, among others. The certainty of evidence on adverse outcomes was low to very low for most outcomes.We analysed interventions targeting sugar-sweetened milk separately, and found low- to moderate-certainty evidence that emoticon labelling and small prizes for the selection of healthier beverages in elementary school cafeterias are associated with decreased consumption of sugar-sweetened milk. We found low-certainty evidence that improved placement of plain milk in school cafeterias is not associated with decreasing sugar-sweetened milk consumption.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence included in this review indicates that effective, scalable interventions addressing SSB consumption at a population level exist. Implementation should be accompanied by high-quality evaluations using appropriate study designs, with a particular focus on the long-term effects of approaches suitable for large-scale implementation.

Innovation to Create a Healthy and Sustainable Food System: A Science Advisory From the American Heart Association

Current dietary intakes of North Americans are inconsistent with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans . This occurs in the context of a food system that precludes healthy foods as the default choices. To develop a food system that is both healthy and sustainable requires innovation. This science advisory from the American Heart Association describes both innovative approaches to developing a healthy and sustainable food system and the current evidence base for the associations between these approaches and positive changes in dietary behaviors, dietary intakes, and when available, health outcomes. Innovation can occur through policy, private sector, public health, medical, community, or individual-level approaches and could ignite and further public-private partnerships. New product innovations, reformulations, taxes, incentives, product placement/choice architecture, innovative marketing practices, menu and product labeling, worksite wellness initiatives, community campaigns, nutrition prescriptions, mobile health technologies, and gaming offer potential benefits. Some innovations have been observed to increase the purchasing of healthy foods or have increased diversity in food choices, but there remains limited evidence linking these innovations with health outcomes. The demonstration of evidence-based improvements in health outcomes is challenging for any preventive interventions, especially those related to diet, because of competing lifestyle and environmental risk factors that are difficult to quantify. A key next step in creating a healthier and more sustainable food system is to build innovative system-level approaches that improve individual behaviors, strengthen industry and community efforts, and align policies with evidence-based recommendations. To enable healthier food choices and favorably impact cardiovascular health, immediate action is needed to promote favorable innovation at all levels of the food system.

Healthy food marketing and purchases of fruits and vegetables in large grocery stores

Healthy food marketing in the retail environment can be an important driver of fruit and vegetable purchases. In Los Angeles County, the Nutrition Education and Obesity Prevention (NEOP) program utilized this strategy to promote healthy eating among low-income families that shop at large retail chain stores. The present study assessed whether self-reported exposure to large retail NEOP interventions, including seeing at least one store visual, watching an in-store cooking demonstration, and/or seeing at least one program advertisement, were associated with increased fruit and vegetable purchases. During fall 2014, the Division of Chronic Disease and Injury Prevention in the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health partnered with Samuels Center to conduct store patron intercept surveys at six large food retail stores participating in NEOP across Los Angeles County. Of 1050 participants who completed the survey, almost a quarter (25.0%) reported seeing at least one visual throughout the store and 9.2% watched a cooking demonstration. Seeing at least one visual and watching a cooking demonstration were not significantly associated with percent dollars spent on fruits and vegetables each week. Among participants who reported being exposed to at least one store visual, those enrolled in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) reported spending 6% more on fruits and vegetables than those who were not enrolled (p = 0.046). Although the NEOP store interventions did not individually increase store purchases, their educational value may still influence patron food selection, especially if coupled to the monetary resources of SNAP for those who are enrolled.

•

Seeing a store visual was not associated with percent dollars spent on produce.

•

Of those who saw a visual, females spent more on fruits and vegetables than males.

•

SNAP enrollees spent 6% more than non-enrollees on produce.

The Effect of Randomly Providing Nutri-Score Information on Actual Purchases in Colombia

Recently, front-of-package (FOP) food labeling systems have captured the attention of researchers and policy makers. Several Latin American governments are currently considering employing different FOP labeling systems. However, there is much need for more research-based evidence in these countries. In this paper, we study whether food-purchasing decisions and the nutritional qualities of those purchases are influenced by randomly informing some customers and not others about an FOP label known as Nutri-Score. We also separate the information effect from the effect of being aware of the system. We combined a randomized field intervention in a university cafeteria in Bogotá, Colombia with data from an after-purchase survey and receipts. We found that randomly providing information on Nutri-Score increased total expenditure by $0.18. Additional spending on healthier items was 21% or $0.26 higher, with no change for less healthy items. Expenditure estimates were higher among customers who were aware of the system’s existence. Customers in the study were also 10% more likely to buy a healthier item than control customers were, and the concentration of protein in their purchases was greater. Information on the Nutri-Score system increased the store’s sales. This potential financial incentive may facilitate the implementation of Nutri-Score.

A Meta-Analysis of Food Labeling Effects on Consumer Diet Behaviors and Industry Practices

CONTEXT

The influence of food and beverage labeling (food labeling) on consumer behaviors, industry responses, and health outcomes is not well established.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed. Ten databases were searched in 2014 for studies published after 1990 evaluating food labeling and consumer purchases/orders, intakes, metabolic risk factors, and industry responses. Data extractions were performed independently and in duplicate. Studies were pooled using inverse-variance random effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was explored with I2, stratified analyses, and meta-regression; and publication bias was assessed with funnel plots, Begg's tests, and Egger's tests. Analyses were completed in 2017.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

From 6,232 articles, a total of 60 studies were identified, including 2 million observations across 111 intervention arms in 11 countries. Food labeling decreased consumer intakes of energy by 6.6% (95% CI= -8.8%, -4.4%, n=31), total fat by 10.6% (95% CI= -17.7%, -3.5%, n=13), and other unhealthy dietary options by 13.0% (95% CI= -25.7%, -0.2%, n=16), while increasing vegetable consumption by 13.5% (95% CI=2.4%, 24.6%, n=5). Evaluating industry responses, labeling decreased product contents of sodium by 8.9% (95% CI= -17.3%, -0.6%, n=4) and artificial trans fat by 64.3% (95% CI= -91.1%, -37.5%, n=3). No significant heterogeneity was identified by label placement or type, duration, labeled product, region, population, voluntary or legislative approaches, combined intervention components, study design, or quality. Evidence for publication bias was not identified.

CONCLUSIONS

From reviewing 60 intervention studies, food labeling reduces consumer dietary intake of selected nutrients and influences industry practices to reduce product contents of sodium and artificial trans fat.

Development and Validation of a Simple Convenience Store SHELF Audit

Background This paper describes the development, reliability, and convergent validity of a practical tool—the Convenience Store Supportive Healthy Environment for Life-Promoting Food (SHELF) Audit. Methods Audit items included: a variety of fresh, processed, and frozen fruits and vegetables; low-fat dairy products; healthy staples and frozen meals; healthy food incentive programs; items sold in check-out areas; portion/cup sizes; and pricing. Each audit item was scored using a five-point semantic-differential scale (1 = provides little or no support for healthful foods to 5 = provides high support for healthful foods). Convergent validity was examined by comparing the SHELF audit to Ghirardelli et al. and Laska et al. store audits. Statistical analysis included: Factor analysis, ANOVA, and Spearman correlations. Results SHELF included three factors: a Fruits/Vegetables scale (eight items, α = 0.79; total potential points = 34); a Healthy Foods scale (four items, α = 0.72; total potential points = 16); and a Supports scale (four items, α = 0.685; total potential points = 16). Only 6% of the 124 convenience stores assessed scored in the most healthful range (46–66). The assessed drug stores (n = 15) scored higher than convenience stores (n = 81) on the Healthy Foods and Supports scales but not the Fruits/Vegetables scale. The SHELF sub-scores were highly correlated with other audit tools indicating convergent validity. Conclusion The SHELF convenience store audit is a valid, reliable tool for assessing the degree to which convenience stores support healthfulness regarding Fruits/Vegetables, Healthy Foods, and Supports for choosing healthy.

Alignment of Supermarket Own Brand Foods' Front-of-Pack Nutrition Labelling with Measures of Nutritional Quality: An Australian Perspective

Two voluntary front-of-pack nutrition labels (FOPNL) are present in Australia: the government-led Health Star Ratings (HSR) and food industry-led Daily Intake Guide (DIG). Australia's two largest supermarkets are key supporters of HSR, pledging uptake on all supermarket own brand foods (SOBF). This study aimed to examine prevalence of FOPNL on SOBF, and alignment with patterns of nutritional quality. Photographic audits of all SOBF present in three large supermarkets were conducted in Perth, Western Australia, in 2017. Foods were classified as nutritious or nutrient-poor based on the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating (AGTHE), NOVA level of food processing, and HSR score. Most (81.5%) SOBF featured FOPNL, with only 55.1% displaying HSR. HSR was present on 69.2% of Coles, 54.0% of Woolworths, and none of IGA SOBF. Half (51.3%) of SOBF were classified as nutritious using the AGTHE, but using NOVA, 56.9% were ultra-processed foods. Nutrient-poor and ultra-processed SOBF were more likely than nutritious foods to include HSR, yet many of these foods achieved HSR scores of 2.5 stars or above, implying they were a healthy choice. Supermarkets have a powerful position in the Australian food system, and they could do more to support healthy food selection through responsible FOPNL.

Objective understanding of Nutri-Score Front-Of-Package nutrition label according to individual characteristics of subjects: Comparisons with other format labels

Background

To improve nutritional status and prevent chronic nutrition-related diseases, international organizations have recommended the use of multiple strategies, including front-of-package nutrition labelling (FOPL). In France, the Nutri-Score has been selected by health authorities in March 2017. However, to be effective in purchasing situations, the label needs to be well understood, which may be influenced by label format and sociodemographic characteristics. This study aimed at investigating the objective understanding of the Nutri-Score compared to other label formats, and more particularly among specific at-risk populations.

Methods

The objective understanding of four FOPLs—namely Nutri-Score, Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL), the simplified nutrition labelling system (SENS), and modified Reference Intakes (mRIs)—was investigated in a sample from the NutriNet-Santé French cohort (n = 3,751). Logistic regression mixed models were computed to assess the association of the four FOPLs, compared to a “no label” situation, on the consumers’ ability to rank products according to their overall nutritional quality. Objective understanding was also investigated according to sociodemographic and lifestyle characteristics.

Results

Compared to a “no label” situation, all FOPLs were significantly associated to an increase in consumers’ ability to classify the products correctly, with wide disparities in results according to formats. The best performance was observed for the Nutri-Score (OR = 20.33(17.68–23.37)), followed by SENS (OR = 9.57(8.50–10.77)), MTL (OR = 3.55(3.20–3.93)) and mRIs (OR = 1.53(1.39–1.69)). This ranking was similar among all sub-populations and the ORs associated to the Nutri-Score were over 10, whichever the sub-group considered. Women, younger people, non-smokers, individuals with higher educational level and those with children had a higher capacity to identify healthier products (all P≤0.05).

Conclusion

Nutri-Score, with a summarized graded and color-coded format, using semantic colours, is associated to a higher objective understanding than monochrome and nutrient-specific labels. Furthermore, though objective understanding may differ according to individual characteristics of subjects, the magnitude of effect of the Nutri-Score largely outweighed this effect, even in the at-risk populations.

Reported Influences on Restaurant-Type Food Selection Decision Making in a Grocery Store Chain

OBJECTIVE

To examine food decision-making priorities for restaurant-type foods at grocery stores and determine whether adding calorie information, as required by federal menu labeling laws, affected decision-making priorities.

DESIGN

Natural experiment: intervention and control groups with baseline and follow-up.

SETTING

Regional grocery store chain with 9 locations.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants (n = 393; mean age, 54.8 ± 15.1 years) were primarily women (71%) and Caucasian (95%).

INTERVENTION

Data were collected before and after calorie information was added to restaurant-type foods at 4 intervention locations.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Primary influencers of food selection decision making for restaurant-type foods and frequency of use of nutrition information.

ANALYSIS

Quantitative analysis examined the top 3 influencers of food selections and chi-square goodness of fit test determined whether the calorie labeling intervention changed food decision-making priorities. Qualitative data were used to describe responses.

RESULTS

Taste, cost, and convenience were the most frequently reported influencers of restaurant-type food selections; 20% of participants rated calories as influential. Calorie labeling did not affect food selection decision making; 16% of participants in intervention stores noticed calorie labels. Qualitative explanations confirmed these findings.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Menu labeling laws increase access to calorie information; however, use of this information is limited. Additional interventions are needed to encourage healthier restaurant-type food selections in grocery stores.

Conocimiento y uso del etiquetado nutrimental de alimentos y bebidas industrializados en México

 Objetivo. Documentar el conocimiento y uso de la información de las diferentes etiquetas colocadas en los productos industrializados en México. Material y méto­dos. En una submuestra de la Encuesta Nacional de Salud y Nutrición de Medio Camino 2016, se aplicó un cuestionario semiestructurado, desarrollado por investigadores libres de conflicto de interés, previamente validado y piloteado en población de diferentes estratos socioeconómicos, grupos de edad y regiones del país. Resultados. Se entrevistó a 8 667 adultos ≥20 años de edad. El etiquetado más utilizado para la elección de alimentos y bebidas industrializados fue la “tabla nutrimental” 41.5% (IC95% 36.9-46.3) y el de menor uso el “sello nutrimental” 4.3% (IC95% 3.1-5.7). Conclusiones. Es de suma importancia que las instancias reguladoras, en coordinación con la Secretaría de Salud, implementen un etiquetado frontal rápido de leer y de fácil comprensión con criterios nutrimentales que garanticen el cumplimiento de lo expuesto en los documentos oficiales, así como la estandarización del porcentaje de consumo de azúcar al recomendado por la OMS o a una menor cantidad dada la alerta epidemiológica por diabetes que experimenta el país.

A Supermarket Double-Dollar Incentive Program Increases Purchases of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables Among Low-Income Families With Children: The Healthy Double Study

OBJECTIVE

To carry out a pilot study to determine whether a supermarket double-dollar fruit and vegetable (F&V) incentive increases F&V purchases among low-income families.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled design. Purchases were tracked using a loyalty card that provided participants with a 5% discount on all purchases during a 3-month baseline period followed by the 4-month intervention.

SETTING

A supermarket in a low-income rural Maine community.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 401 low-income and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) supermarket customers.

INTERVENTION

Same-day coupon at checkout for half-off eligible fresh, frozen, or canned F&V over 4 months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Weekly spending in dollars on eligible F&V.

ANALYSIS

A linear model with random intercepts accounted for repeated transactions by individuals to estimate change in F&V spending per week from baseline to intervention. Secondary analyses examined changes among SNAP-eligible participants.

RESULTS

Coupons were redeemed among 53% of eligible baskets. Total weekly F&V spending increased in the intervention arm compared with control ($1.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], $0.29 to $3.88). The largest increase was for fresh F&V ($1.97; 95% CI, $0.49 to $3.44). Secondary analyses revealed greater increases in F&V spending among SNAP-eligible participants who redeemed coupons ($5.14; 95% CI, $1.93 to $8.34) than among non-SNAP eligible participants who redeemed coupons ($3.88; 95% CI, $1.67 to $6.08).

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

A double-dollar pricing incentive increased F&V spending in a low-income community despite the moderate uptake of the coupon redemption. Customers who were eligible for SNAP saw the greatest F&V spending increases. Financial incentives for F&V are an effective strategy for food assistance programs to increase healthy purchases and improve dietary intake in low-income families.

Nutritional labelling for healthier food or non-alcoholic drink purchasing and consumption

BACKGROUND

Nutritional labelling is advocated as a means to promote healthier food purchasing and consumption, including lower energy intake. Internationally, many different nutritional labelling schemes have been introduced. There is no consensus on whether such labelling is effective in promoting healthier behaviour.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of nutritional labelling for food and non-alcoholic drinks on purchasing and consumption of healthier items. Our secondary objective was to explore possible effect moderators of nutritional labelling on purchasing and consumption.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 13 electronic databases including CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase to 26 April 2017. We also handsearched references and citations and sought unpublished studies through websites and trials registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible studies: were randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs/Q-RCTs), controlled before-and-after studies, or interrupted time series (ITS) studies; compared a labelled product (with information on nutrients or energy) with the same product without a nutritional label; assessed objectively measured purchasing or consumption of foods or non-alcoholic drinks in real-world or laboratory settings.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted study data. We applied the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool and GRADE to assess the quality of evidence. We pooled studies that evaluated similar interventions and outcomes using a random-effects meta-analysis, and we synthesised data from other studies in a narrative summary.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 28 studies, comprising 17 RCTs, 5 Q-RCTs and 6 ITS studies. Most (21/28) took place in the USA, and 19 took place in university settings, 14 of which mainly involved university students or staff. Most (20/28) studies assessed the impact of labelling on menus or menu boards, or nutritional labelling placed on, or adjacent to, a range of foods or drinks from which participants could choose. Eight studies provided participants with only one labelled food or drink option (in which labelling was present on a container or packaging, adjacent to the food or on a display board) and measured the amount consumed. The most frequently assessed labelling type was energy (i.e. calorie) information (12/28).Eleven studies assessed the impact of nutritional labelling on purchasing food or drink options in real-world settings, including purchases from vending machines (one cluster-RCT), grocery stores (one ITS), or restaurants, cafeterias or coffee shops (three RCTs, one Q-RCT and five ITS). Findings on vending machines and grocery stores were not interpretable, and were rated as very low quality. A meta-analysis of the three RCTs, all of which assessed energy labelling on menus in restaurants, demonstrated a statistically significant reduction of 47 kcal in energy purchased (MD -46.72 kcal, 95% CI -78.35, -15.10, N = 1877). Assuming an average meal of 600 kcal, energy labelling on menus would reduce energy purchased per meal by 7.8% (95% CI 2.5% to 13.1%). The quality of the evidence for these three studies was rated as low, so our confidence in the effect estimate is limited and may change with further studies. Of the remaining six studies, only two (both ITS studies involving energy labels on menus or menus boards in a coffee shop or cafeteria) were at low risk of bias, and their results support the meta-analysis. The results of the other four studies which were conducted in a restaurant, cafeterias (2 studies) or a coffee shop, were not clearly reported and were at high risk of bias.Seventeen studies assessed the impact of nutritional labels on consumption in artificial settings or scenarios (henceforth referred to as laboratory studies or settings). Of these, eight (all RCTs) assessed the effect of labels on menus or placed on a range of food options. A meta-analysis of these studies did not conclusively demonstrate a reduction in energy consumed during a meal (MD -50 kcal, 95% CI -104.41, 3.88, N = 1705). We rated the quality of the evidence as low, so our confidence in the effect estimate is limited and may change with further studies.Six laboratory studies (four RCTs and two Q-RCTs) assessed the impact of labelling a single food or drink option (such as chocolate, pasta or soft drinks) on energy consumed during a snack or meal. A meta-analysis of these studies did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in energy (kcal) consumed (SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.27, N = 732). However, the confidence intervals were wide, suggesting uncertainty in the true effect size. We rated the quality of the evidence as low, so our confidence in the effect estimate is limited and may change with further studies.There was no evidence that nutritional labelling had the unintended harm of increasing energy purchased or consumed. Indirect evidence came from five laboratory studies that involved mislabelling single nutrient content (i.e. placing low energy or low fat labels on high-energy foods) during a snack or meal. A meta-analysis of these studies did not demonstrate a statistically significant increase in energy (kcal) consumed (SMD 0.19, 95% CI -0.14to 0.51, N = 718). The effect was small and the confidence intervals wide, suggesting uncertainty in the true effect size. We rated the quality of the evidence from these studies as very low, providing very little confidence in the effect estimate.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Findings from a small body of low-quality evidence suggest that nutritional labelling comprising energy information on menus may reduce energy purchased in restaurants. The evidence assessing the impact on consumption of energy information on menus or on a range of food options in laboratory settings suggests a similar effect to that observed for purchasing, although the evidence is less definite and also of low quality.Accordingly, and in the absence of observed harms, we tentatively suggest that nutritional labelling on menus in restaurants could be used as part of a wider set of measures to tackle obesity. Additional high-quality research in real-world settings is needed to enable more certain conclusions.Further high-quality research is also needed to address the dearth of evidence from grocery stores and vending machines and to assess potential moderators of the intervention effect, including socioeconomic status.

The impact of interpretive and reductive front-of-pack labels on food choice and willingness to pay

BACKGROUND

This study examined how front-of-pack labels and product healthfulness affect choice and willingness to pay across a range of foods. It was hypothesized that: (i) product choice and (ii) willingness to pay would be more aligned with product healthfulness when healthfulness was expressed through the Health Star Rating, followed by the Multiple Traffic Light, then the Daily Intake Guide, and (iii) the Nutrition Facts Panel would be viewed infrequently.

METHODS

Adults and children aged 10+ years (n = 2069) completed an online discrete choice task involving mock food packages. A 4 food type (cookies, corn flakes, pizza, yoghurt) × 2 front-of-pack label presence (present, absent) × 3 front-of-pack label type (Daily Intake Guide, Multiple Traffic Light, Health Star Rating) × 3 price (cheap, moderate, expensive) × 3 healthfulness (less healthy, moderately healthy, healthier) design was used. A 30 s time limit was imposed for each choice.

RESULTS

Of the three front-of-pack labels tested, the Health Star Rating produced the largest differences in choices, with 40% (95% CIs: 38%-42%) of respondents selecting the healthier variant, 33% selecting the moderately healthy variant (95% CIs: 31%-35%), and 23% (95% CIs: 21%-24%) selecting the less healthy variant of the four products included in the study. The Multiple Traffic Light led to significant differences in choices between healthier (35%, 95% CIs: 33%-37%) and less healthy products (29%, 95% CIs: 27%-31%), but not moderately healthy products (32%, 95% CIs: 30%-34%). No significant differences in choices were observed by product healthfulness when the Daily Intake Guide was present. Only the Health Star Rating resulted in a significantly greater willingness to pay for healthier versus less healthy products. The Nutrition Facts Panel was viewed for only 7% of all mock packages.

CONCLUSIONS

Front-of-pack labels that are more interpretive, such as the Health Star Rating, can be more effective at directing consumers towards healthier choices than reductive front-of-pack labels such as the Daily Intake Guide. The study results provide policy makers with clear guidance on the types of front-of-pack labels that are most likely to achieve positive health outcomes at a population level.

Do nutrition labels influence healthier food choices? Analysis of label viewing behaviour and subsequent food purchases in a labelling intervention trial

BACKGROUND

There are few objective data on how nutrition labels are used in real-world shopping situations, or how they affect dietary choices and patterns.

DESIGN

The Starlight study was a four-week randomised, controlled trial of the effects of three different types of nutrition labels on consumer food purchases: Traffic Light Labels, Health Star Rating labels, or Nutrition Information Panels (control). Smartphone technology allowed participants to scan barcodes of packaged foods and receive randomly allocated labels on their phone screen, and to record their food purchases. The study app therefore provided objectively recorded data on label viewing behaviour and food purchases over a four-week period. A post-hoc analysis of trial data was undertaken to assess frequency of label use, label use by food group, and association between label use and the healthiness of packaged food products purchased.

RESULTS

Over the four-week intervention, study participants (n = 1255) viewed nutrition labels for and/or purchased 66,915 barcoded packaged products. Labels were viewed for 23% of all purchased products, with decreasing frequency over time. Shoppers were most likely to view labels for convenience foods, cereals, snack foods, bread and bakery products, and oils. They were least likely to view labels for sugar and honey products, eggs, fish, fruit and vegetables, and meat. Products for which participants viewed the label and subsequently purchased the product during the same shopping episode were significantly healthier than products where labels were viewed but the product was not subsequently purchased: mean difference in nutrient profile score -0.90 (95% CI -1.54 to -0.26).

CONCLUSIONS

In a secondary analysis of a nutrition labelling intervention trial, there was a significant association between label use and the healthiness of products purchased. Nutrition label use may therefore lead to healthier food purchases.

Effects of Different Types of Front-of-Pack Labelling Information on the Healthiness of Food Purchases-A Randomised Controlled Trial

Background: Front-of-pack nutrition labelling may support healthier packaged food purchases. Australia has adopted a novel Health Star Rating (HSR) system, but the legitimacy of this choice is unknown. Objective: To define the effects of different formats of front-of-pack labelling on the healthiness of food purchases and consumer perceptions. Design: Individuals were assigned at random to access one of four different formats of nutrition labelling—HSR, multiple traffic light labels (MTL), daily intake guides (DIG), recommendations/warnings (WARN)—or control (the nutrition information panel, NIP). Participants accessed nutrition information by using a smartphone application to scan the bar-codes of packaged foods, while shopping. The primary outcome was healthiness defined by the mean transformed nutrient profile score of packaged foods that were purchased over four weeks. Results: The 1578 participants, mean age 38 years, 84% female recorded purchases of 148,727 evaluable food items. The mean healthiness of the purchases in the HSR group was non-inferior to MTL, DIG, or WARN (all p < 0.001 at 2% non-inferiority margin). When compared to the NIP control, there was no difference in the mean healthiness of purchases for HSR, MTL, or DIG (all p > 0.07), but WARN resulted in healthier packaged food purchases (mean difference 0.87; 95% confidence interval 0.03 to 1.72; p = 0.04). HSR was perceived by participants as more useful than DIG, and easier to understand than MTL or DIG (all p < 0.05). Participants also reported the HSR to be easier to understand, and the HSR and MTL to be more useful, than NIP (all p < 0.03). Conclusions: These real-world data align with experimental findings and provide support for the policy choice of HSR. Recommendation/warning labels warrant further exploration, as they may be a stronger driver of healthy food purchases.