Department of Psychology, University of Liverpool, Eleanor Rathbone Building, Bedford Street South, Liverpool, L69 7ZA, UK.
Department of Public Health Policy and Systems, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2023 Feb 6;20(1):10. doi: 10.1186/s12966-023-01418-0.
There are well documented socioeconomic disparities in diet quality and obesity. Menu energy labelling is a public health policy designed to improve diet and reduce obesity. However, it is unclear whether the impact energy labelling has on consumer behaviour is socially equitable or differs based on socioeconomic position (SEP).
Systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental (between-subjects) and pre-post implementation field studies examining the impact of menu energy labelling on energy content of food and/or drink selections in higher vs. lower SEP groups.
Seventeen studies were eligible for inclusion. Meta-analyses of 13 experimental studies that predominantly examined hypothetical food and drink choices showed that energy labelling tended to be associated with a small reduction in energy content of selections that did not differ based on participant SEP (X(1) = 0.26, p = .610). Effect estimates for higher SEP SMD = 0.067 [95% CI: -0.092 to 0.226] and lower SEP SMD = 0.115 [95% CI: -0.006 to 0.237] were similar. A meta-analysis of 3 pre-post implementation studies of energy labelling in the real world showed that the effect energy labelling had on consumer behaviour did not significantly differ based on SEP (X(1) = 0.22, p = .636). In higher SEP the effect was SMD = 0.032 [95% CI: -0.053 to 0.117] and in lower SEP the effect was SMD = -0.005 [95% CI: -0.051 to 0.041].
Overall there was no convincing evidence that the effect energy labelling has on consumer behaviour significantly differs based on SEP. Further research examining multiple indicators of SEP and quantifying the long-term effects of energy labelling on consumer behaviour in real-world settings is now required.
Registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022312532) and OSF ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/W7RDB ).
饮食质量和肥胖方面存在着有据可查的社会经济差异。菜单能量标签是一项旨在改善饮食和减少肥胖的公共卫生政策。然而,目前尚不清楚标签对消费者行为的影响是否在社会公平方面是一致的,或者是否因社会经济地位(SEP)的不同而有所差异。
对实验(组间)和实施前的实地研究进行系统评价和荟萃分析,以检验菜单能量标签对高 SEP 与低 SEP 群体的食物和/或饮料选择的能量含量的影响。
有 17 项研究符合纳入标准。对主要研究假设食物和饮料选择的 13 项实验研究进行荟萃分析显示,能量标签通常与选择的食物能量含量略有降低相关,且这种影响不因参与者的 SEP 而异(X(1) = 0.26,p =.610)。高 SEP 的 SMD 效应估计值为 0.067 [95%CI:-0.092 至 0.226],低 SEP 的 SMD 效应估计值为 0.115 [95%CI:-0.006 至 0.237],两者相似。对现实世界中能量标签实施前后的 3 项研究进行荟萃分析显示,能量标签对消费者行为的影响与 SEP 并无显著差异(X(1) = 0.22,p =.636)。在高 SEP 中,效应的 SMD 为 0.032 [95%CI:-0.053 至 0.117],在低 SEP 中,效应的 SMD 为-0.005 [95%CI:-0.051 至 0.041]。
总体而言,没有令人信服的证据表明,能量标签对消费者行为的影响在社会经济地位方面存在显著差异。现在需要进一步研究,用多个 SEP 指标进行检验,并量化现实环境中能量标签对消费者行为的长期影响。
评论:已在 PROSPERO(CRD42022312532)和 OSF(https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/W7RDB)上进行了注册。