ArticleBMC nutrition2025
Associations between the overall nutritional quality of prepackaged food categories consumed at breakfast or as snacks and the presence of nutrition-related labelling messages: a cross-sectional analysis of products sold in the province of Québec (Canada).
Article in BMC nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundIn Canada, there are no requirements regarding the healthfulness of foods carrying nutrition claims. Also, as of 2026, most prepackaged foods with a high content in saturated fat, sugars and/or sodium will be required to display Health Canada's front-of-pack symbol (HC-FOPS), regardless of their overall nutritional quality. This study aims to evaluate the associations between the overall nutritional quality of prepackaged foods and the presence of nutrition claims as well as of HC-FOPS on those foods.
methodsThe score from -15 (more nutritious) to + 40 (less nutritious) or the accompanying grade from A to E generated by the Nutri-Score was used to assess the overall nutritional quality of four food categories from the Food Quality Observatory: Breakfast cereals (n = 310), Sliced breads (n = 261), Granola bars (n = 234), and Yogurts and dairy desserts (n = 279). Data were sales-weighted to better represent what consumers are buying.
resultsIn all categories, products with nutrition claims had a better overall nutritional quality (i.e. lower sales-weighted mean score) than products without claims (e.g. 8.00 ± 5.70 vs. 12.14 ± 4.41, respectively, for Breakfast cereals; -0.56 ± 3.01 vs. 1.31 ± 2.04 for Sliced breads; 10.16 ± 3.50 vs. 15.56 ± 5.00 for Granola bars; 0.43 ± 1.65 vs. 1.38 ± 2.70 for Yogurts and dairy desserts; all p ≤ 0.0004). Conversely, products which would be required to carry HC-FOPS generally had a lower overall nutritional quality than products which would not carry the symbol. However, additional analyses showed that some less nutritious foods (i.e. graded with letters D or E) carried nutrition claims or would not be required to display HC-FOPS, particularly in the categories of Granola bars (43.2% and 38.5%, respectively) and Breakfast cereals (23.8% and 11.8%).
conclusionsThese findings show that while the presence of nutrition claims and the absence of HC-FOPS are generally indicative of a better overall nutritional quality, inconsistencies persist. This highlights the importance of strong educational campaigns to help consumers use nutrition-related labelling messages adequately. Results could also be used to support a more stringent regulatory framework for nutrition claims and HC-FOPS.
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.