SynthesisBMC public health2025
The effectiveness of digital nudging in improving dietary quality: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Adherence to healthy and sustainable diets and health-related behaviors in a Spanish online university setting.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Beyond one-shot nudges: the effects of repeated interventions for healthier online meal ordering.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDigital nudging is increasingly being used in the field of dietary quality change. However, existing reviews have not systematically evaluated the comparative effectiveness of different digital nudging strategies on dietary quality, particularly within the context of randomized controlled trials.
objectiveThe objective of this study was to systematically review the scientific literature on the effectiveness of digital nudging in improving dietary quality, as observed in randomized controlled trials.
designA systematic review of randomized controlled trials. INFORMATION SOURCES: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, Embase, VIP, CNKI, and Wanfang database.
methodsA structured search was conducted by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The initial search spanned studies from the inception of each database to July 7, 2024, and an updated search was performed from July 8, 2024, to April 30, 2025. The Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool (ROB 2) was used to assess the risk of bias in the trials.
resultsA total of 22 trials were included in the review, with most studies showing a high risk of attrition bias. Among them, seven were conducted in the United States, 13 in Europe, and 2 in Asia, all involving adult participants aged 18 years or older. Nutritional labeling (n = 11), increased product accessibility (n = 5), framing effects (n = 4), and priming nudges (n = 1) were each associated with improvements in dietary quality. In particular, combined nudging strategies, especially the combination of labeling and availability enhancement (n = 5), demonstrated stronger effects than single nudges. The effectiveness of digital nudging interventions was also influenced by factors such as individuals' dietary preferences, contextual settings, and socioeconomic status.
conclusionsDigital nudging, particularly with nutritional labels and increasing accessibility of products, showed the most consistent positive effects, improving food choice and dietary intake. CLINICAL
trial registrationThe review protocol was registered in PROSPERO under the number CRD42024560677.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.