No abstract

Objective: Food prepared and consumed away from home accounts for a significant proportion of dietary intake among Canadians. Currently, Canadians receive little or no nutrition information when eating in restaurant and fast-food outlets. The present study examined the impact of nutrition information on menus in hospital cafeterias on noticing and perceived influence of nutrition information and on food consumption. Design: Cross-sectional surveys. Setting: Exit surveys (n 1003) were conducted in two hospital cafeterias. The 'intervention' site featured energy (calorie), sodium and fat content on digital menu boards, as well as a health logo for 'healthier' items. The intervention site had also revised its menu items to improve the nutrient profiles. The 'control' site provided limited nutrition information at the point of sale. Subjects: Cafeteria patrons recruited using the intercept technique. Results: Significantly more respondents at the intervention site reported noticing nutrition information (OR 5 7?6, P , 0?001) and using nutrition information to select their food items (OR 5 3?3, P , 0?001) compared with patrons at the control site, after adjusting for sociodemographic factors. Patrons at the intervention site consumed significantly less energy (221 %, P , 0?001), sodium (223 %, P , 0?001), saturated fat (233 %, P , 0?001) and total fat (237 %, P , 0?001) than patrons at the control site. Conclusions: A nutritional programme, including nutrition information on menus and improved nutrition profile of food offerings, was associated with substantial reductions in energy, sodium and fat consumption. The results are consistent with a positive impact of menu labelling.

Summary Addressing obesity and improving the diets of populations requires a comprehensive societal response. The need for broad‐based action has led to a focus on accountability of the key factors that influence food environments, including the food and beverage industry. This paper describes the Business Impact Assessment—Obesity and population‐level nutrition (BIA‐Obesity) tool and process for benchmarking food and beverage company policies and practices related to obesity and population‐level nutrition at the national level. The methods for BIA‐Obesity draw largely from relevant components of the Access to Nutrition Index (ATNI), with specific assessment criteria developed for food and nonalcoholic beverage manufacturers, supermarkets, and chain restaurants, based on international recommendations and evidence of best practices related to each sector. The process for implementing the BIA‐Obesity tool involves independent civil society organisations selecting the most prominent food and beverage companies in each country, engaging with the companies to understand their policies and practices, and assessing each company's policies and practices across six domains. The domains include: “corporate strategy,” “product formulation,” “nutrition labelling,” “product and brand promotion,” “product accessibility,” and “relationships with other organisations.” Assessment of company policies is based on their level of transparency, comprehensiveness, and specificity, with reference to best practice.

Summary The Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food‐EPI) aims to assess the extent of implementation of recommended food environment policies by governments compared with international best practices and prioritize actions to fill implementation gaps. The Food‐EPI was applied in 11 countries across six regions (2015‐2018). National public health nutrition panels (n = 11‐101 experts) rated the extent of implementation of 47 policy and infrastructure support good practice indicators by their government(s) against best practices, using an evidence document verified by government officials. Experts identified and prioritized actions to address implementation gaps. The proportion of indicators at “very low if any,” “low,” “medium,” and “high” implementation, overall Food‐EPI scores, and priority action areas were compared across countries. Inter‐rater reliability was good (GwetAC2 = 0.6‐0.8). Chile had the highest proportion of policies (13%) rated at “high” implementation, while Guatemala had the highest proportion of policies (83%) rated at “very low if any” implementation. The overall Food‐EPI score was “medium” for Australia, England, Chile, and Singapore, while “very low if any” for Guatemala. Policy areas most frequently prioritized included taxes on unhealthy foods, restricting unhealthy food promotion and front‐of‐pack labelling. The Food‐EPI was found to be a robust tool and process to benchmark governments' progress to create healthy food environments.

This study demonstrates support for policies promoting on-shelf nutrition labels designed according to evidence-informed principles, but policymakers should move forward with caution when investing in such systems until research has confirmed optimal label design, clarified the mechanisms through which dietary intake is improved, and assessed associations with nutrition-related health outcomes.

Background: Poor diet is a significant contributor to the burden of global disease. There are numerous policies available to address poor diets; however, these policies often require public support to encourage policy action. The current study aimed to understand the level of public support for a range of food policies and the factors associated with policy support. Methods: An online survey measuring support for 13 food policies was completed by 19,857 adults in Australia, Canada, Mexico, the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States (US). The proportion of respondents that supported each policy was compared between countries, and the association between demographic characteristics and policy support was analysed using multivariate logistic regression. Results: The level of support varied between policies, with the highest support for policies that provided incentives (e.g., price subsidies) or information (e.g., calorie labelling on menus), and the lowest support for those that imposed restrictions (e.g., restrictions on sponsorship of sport events). This pattern of support was similar in all countries, but the level differed, with Mexico generally recording the highest support across policies, and the US the lowest. Several demographic characteristics were associated with policy support; however, these relationships varied between countries. Conclusion: The results suggest that support for food policies is influenced by several factors related to the policy design, country, and individual demographic characteristics. Policymakers and advocates should consider these factors when developing and promoting policy options.

A between-groups experiment examined the salience of front-of-package (FOP) symbols. Adults from Canada, the US, Australia, and the UK completed an online survey (n = 11,617). Respondents were randomized to view cereal boxes displaying one of 11 FOP label conditions for ‘high’ levels of sugar and saturated fat: control (no FOP symbol), red circle, red ‘stop sign’, magnifying glass, magnifying glass + exclamation mark, and ‘caution’ triangle + exclamation mark, plus each of these five conditions accompanied by a ‘high in’ text descriptor. Participants identified the amount of saturated fat and sugar in the product (‘low’/’moderate’/’high’). Participants were more likely to correctly identify the product as ‘high’ in saturated fat or sugar when shown the stop sign, triangle + exclamation mark, red circle, or magnifying glass + exclamation mark symbols incorporating ‘high in’ text (p < 0.01). The magnifying glass was the least effective symbol. The stop sign (37.7%) and triangle + exclamation mark (22.0%) were most frequently selected as the best symbol for indicating high nutrient amounts. Overall, FOP labels with ‘high in’ descriptions, red color and intuitive ‘warning’ symbols (e.g., stop signs, exclamation marks, ‘caution’ triangles) were more effective at communicating high levels of nutrients of public health concern in a time-limited environment.

Online food delivery services like Just Eat and Grubhub facilitate online ordering and home delivery of food prepared away-from-home. It is poorly understood how these services are used and by whom. This study investigated the prevalence of online food delivery service use and sociodemographic characteristics of customers, in and across Australia, Canada, Mexico, the UK, and the USA. We analyzed online survey data (n = 19,378) from the International Food Policy Study, conducted in 2018. We identified respondents who reported any online food delivery service use in the past 7 days and calculated the frequency of use and number of meals ordered. We investigated whether odds of any online food delivery service use in the past 7 days differed by sociodemographic characteristics using adjusted logistic regression. Overall, 15% of respondents (n = 2929) reported online food delivery service use, with the greatest prevalence amongst respondents in Mexico (n = 839 (26%)). Online food delivery services had most frequently been used once and the median number of meals purchased through this mode of order was two. Odds of any online food delivery service use were lower per additional year of age (OR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.94, 0.95) and greater for respondents who were male (OR: 1.50; 95% CI: 1.35, 1.66), that identified with an ethnic minority (OR: 1.57; 95% CI: 1.38, 1.78), were highly educated (OR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.46, 1.90), or living with children (OR: 2.71; 95% CI: 2.44, 3.01). Further research is required to explore how online food delivery services may influence diet and health.