Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39558314›Full record

ArticleBMC medicine2024

Impacts of sugar and sweetener warning labels on substitution between sugar- and non-sugar-sweetened beverages in a non-hypothetical selection task.

Caroline Miller, Enola Kay, Joanne Dono, Kerry Ettridge

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Caroline MillerSchool of Public Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia. caroline.miller@adelaide.edu.au.
Enola KayHealth Policy Centre, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, Australia.
Joanne DonoHealth Policy Centre, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, Australia.
Kerry EttridgeSchool of Public Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFront-of-pack (FOP) warning labels have demonstrated effectiveness for reducing sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption and switching to water. However, an unintended consequence is that they may also increase switching to non-sugar-sweetened beverages (NSSBs). A non-hypothetical experimental study examined the effectiveness of combining sugar and sweetener FOP warning labels to reduce sugary drink consumption and prevent NSSB substitution. The study also examined potential integration with Australia and New Zealand's existing Health Star Rating (HSR) system to determine suitability for local context and other jurisdictions with interpretive labelling schemes already in place.

methodsParticipants (N = 414) accessed an online convenience store app via an on-campus laptop to select one drink from an array of 10 beverages, on three occasions. Drink options included a variety of SSBs, 100% fruit juice, NSSBs, and water. Following an escalating exposure procedure, drinks were presented (1) without any additional labelling, (2) with warning labels added to sugary drinks or to both sugary drinks and NSSBs (according to allocated condition), then (3) with HSR icons added to all drinks. Participants were informed they would receive a complementary drink, based on their selections, following the completion of a brief questionnaire.

resultsBaseline results indicated that SSBs and water were the most and least popular drink choices, respectively. Placing FOP warning labels on sugary drinks decreased selection of SSBs and increased NSSB and water choices. Water became the most popular individual drink choice in response to warnings on sugary drinks. Placing FOP warning labels on both sugary drinks and NSSBs successfully avoided an increase in NSSB choices, whilst also increasing water selections, but did not significantly decrease selection of SSBs until HSR ratings were added. The incorporation of HSR icons consolidated warning label effects on NSSB and water selection across both conditions.

conclusionsResults demonstrate the potential of FOP sugar warning labels for addressing beverage consumption behaviours. The incorporation of sweetener warning labels may successfully avoid substitution towards NSSBs, whilst still promoting water choices, but may also dilute the impact of the sugary drinks warning labels. Warning labels were complementary to existing interpretive FOP labels.

Indexed as

Food LabelingSugar-Sweetened BeveragesAdolescentAdultAustraliaBeveragesChoice BehaviorFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNew ZealandSweetening AgentsYoung AdultSweetening AgentsFOPWLFront-of-pack labelsNon-sugar-sweetened beveragesSugar-sweetened beveragesSugary drinksWarning labels

Identifiers

PMID39558314
PMCPMC11574984

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.