College of Health Sciences, University of Technology Jamaica, Kingston, Saint Andrew Parish, Jamaica.
Noncommunicable Diseases and Mental Health, Pan American Health Organization, Washington DC, District of Columbia, USA
BMJ Open. 2023 Apr 6;13(4):e065620. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065620.
To assess the effects of three different front-of-package labelling (FOPL) schemes on objective understanding and intention to purchase of products, in Jamaica.
Supermarkets in Jamaica.
Adult supermarket shoppers in Jamaica (n=1206) aged 18 years old or older were included in the study, except for those visually impaired, or unable to give informed consent.
Multiarm parallel-group randomised trial.
Participants were randomly allocated to one of the three intervention groups or the control group. They were exposed to two-dimensional images of 12 mock-up products presented in random and balanced order. Participants assigned to the intervention groups were exposed to one FOPL scheme: black octagonal warning labels (OWL), magnifying glass high-in single icon (MGG) or traffic-light labelling (TFL). The control group was exposed to the nutrition facts up front.
OR for correctly understanding nutritional information (correctly selecting the least harmful option, correctly identifying sugars, sodium and/or saturated fats found to be in excess) and choosing to purchase the least harmful option (purchase intention), more often.
Compared with the control group, the odds for correctly selecting the least harmful option more often were 107% higher in the OWL group (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.54 to 2.78; p<0.001), whereas the MGG (1.18, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.57; p=0.24) and the TFL (1.13, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.51; p=0.39) were inefficacious in improving such odds. OWL also resulted in the highest odds for correctly identifying a product with excessive amounts of sugars, sodium and/or saturated fats and for deciding to purchase the least harmful option or none of the options.
Octagonal warning labels performed best at improving the ability of adult shoppers in Jamaica to understand the nutrition information and at encouraging them to purchase the least harmful option more often.
评估三种不同的包装正面标签（FOPL）方案对牙买加产品的客观理解和购买意愿的影响。
牙买加的超市。
除了视力障碍者或无法做出知情同意的人外，年龄在 18 岁或以上的牙买加超市购物成年人被纳入研究，共有 1206 人。
多臂平行组随机试验。
参与者被随机分配到三个干预组或对照组之一。他们随机且平衡地暴露于 12 个模拟产品的二维图像下。分配到干预组的参与者接触到一种 FOPL 方案：黑色八角形警告标签（OWL）、放大镜高单一图标（MGG）或红绿灯标签（TFL）。对照组则暴露于营养成分前置。
正确理解营养信息（正确选择危害最小的选项、正确识别糖、钠和/或饱和脂肪含量过高）和选择购买危害最小的选项（购买意愿）的优势比（OR）更高。
与对照组相比，OWL 组正确选择危害最小的选项的优势比更高，为 107%（OR 2.07，95%CI 1.54 至 2.78；p<0.001），而 MGG（1.18，95%CI 0.89 至 1.57；p=0.24）和 TFL（1.13，95%CI 0.85 至 1.51；p=0.39）在提高这种优势比方面均无效。OWL 还导致正确识别含有过量糖、钠和/或饱和脂肪的产品以及决定购买危害最小的选项或不购买任何选项的优势比最高。
八角形警告标签在提高牙买加成年购物者理解营养信息的能力方面表现最佳，并鼓励他们更频繁地购买危害最小的选项。
