Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41121016›Full record

ArticleBMC medicine2025

"It will sort of drive us to rethink our approach to high fat salt sugar products"- a qualitative analysis of businesses' reactions to the landmark Food (Promotion and Placement) Regulations in England.

Preeti Dhuria, Sarah Muir, Sarah Shaw, Wendy Lawrence, Emma Roe, Janis Baird, Christina Vogel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

Preeti DhuriaMedical Research Council Lifecourse Epidemiology Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK. pd@mrc.soton.ac.uk.
Sarah MuirMedical Research Council Lifecourse Epidemiology Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK.
Sarah ShawMedical Research Council Lifecourse Epidemiology Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK.
Wendy LawrencePrimary Care, Population Science and Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Highfield Campus, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK.
Emma RoeSchool of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton, Highfield Campus, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK.
Janis BairdMedical Research Council Lifecourse Epidemiology Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK.
Christina VogelMedical Research Council Lifecourse Epidemiology Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK.

Funding

Public Health Research Programme 17/44/46
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRetail food environments have largely become settings which promote less healthy foods to their customers. In an effort to prompt healthier choices, the UK Government introduced regulations in October 2022 restricting most retailers in England from promoting products high in fat, sugar, or salt (HFSS) at store entrances, aisle-ends, and checkouts, and their online equivalents. Evidence is needed on how businesses approach compliance and adapt to these regulations. This study used in-depth interviews to examine business responses and generate insights to support effective implementation.

methodsThis cross-sectional qualitative study involved semi-structured interviews with 22 business representatives responsible for interpreting and implementing the regulations. The interviews were conducted via MS Teams/Zoom between August 2021-April 2022, prior to the implementation of regulations. Preparations to implement changes and predicted impact on businesses' promotional practices were examined. Six researchers collected and analysed the data using an inductive thematic approach.

resultsParticipants' reactions to regulatory compliance varied according to perceived commercial impact and resource availability. While some businesses explored opportunities for healthful promotions and invested in layout changes, a significant proportion planned to comply only to the letter of the law and were testing alternative strategies for unhealthy promotions. Trade bodies played a crucial role in preparations, supporting member businesses to interpret the regulations and fostering a unified approach to compliance. Anticipated barriers to compliance included challenges such as accurately assessing product scores, reformulating products to meet standards, and ensuring consistent store-level adherence within large businesses. To enhance the regulations' impact, participants called for (i) smaller in-scope businesses to receive additional technical support from the government, (ii) manufacturers be required to share detailed nutrient information with retailers or a centralised product nutrient profile repository be established, and (iii) out-of-home businesses be required to comply.

conclusionsThese mandated regulations hold potential to shift food retailers' priorities from solely profit maximisation, to also supporting public health. However further government action is needed to ensure effective compliance for all business types and sizes. A consistent, long-term policy approach aligned with other food policies and informed by industry expertise to optimise implementation could better support obesity reduction.

Indexed as

CommerceDietary SugarsHealth PromotionCross-Sectional StudiesEnglandHumansQualitative ResearchDietary SugarsBusiness perspectivesFood policyHFSS regulationsLess healthy foods and drinksQualitative researchRetail food environment

Identifiers

PMID41121016
PMCPMC12538778

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.