Is a Front-of-package Label Contaning Information on Both Nutrient Profile and Ultra-processing Well Understood?

University of Paris 13

Status: Completed

Conditions: Objective Understanding of Nutritional Label

Treatments: Other: Front-of-pack label NutriScore 2.0

Study type: Interventional

Funder types: Other

Identifiers

NCT05610930

UParis13-BS

Details and patient eligibility

About

A modified version of the Nutri-Score (Nutri-Score 2.0), containing an additional graphic mention when the product is ultra-processed, has been proposed. The investigators aim to study, in a randomised controlled trial design nested in the NutriNet-Santé cohort, the impact of this modified version on the objective understanding of foods' nutritional quality, and on the identification of UPFs as primary outcomes. They also aim to study as secondary outcomes the impact of this label on purchasing intentions and the product perceived as the healthiest.

Full description

Two arms will be enrolled. The control arm will not have access to any FOP Label (the current situation in Europe), and the experimental arm will have access to Nutri-Score 2.0. Participants of both arms wil be asked to rank food products of 3 categories (breakfast cereals, cookies, ready-to-eat meals) according to their nutrient profile, and to identify ultra-processed foods.

Enrollment: 21,159 patients

Sex: All

Ages: 18 to 99 years old

Volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

Enrolled in the NutriNet-Santé cohort

Exclusion criteria

None

Trial design

Primary purpose: Other

Allocation: Randomized

Interventional model: Parallel Assignment

Masking: Single Blind

---

21,159 participants in 2 patient groups

Control arm

No Intervention group

Description:

Participants received a questionnaire including 3 sets of images of food packaging, (brand blinded), categorized by food groups: 8 cookies, 7 breakfast cereals, and 7 ready-to-eat meals, but without front-of-pack nutritional label (in case the original Nutri-Score was displayed on the product, it was hidden by the investigators). They had the possibility to check the back-of-pack nutrition facts and ingredient information. First, they were asked which product they would intend to purchase in each category, and which product they thought to be the "healthiest". Then, participants were asked 1) to rank them according to their nutritional quality by identifying the first, the second and the third products with the best nutritional quality (in this order) and 2) to identify those that were ultra-processed.

Experimental arm

Experimental group

Description:

Participants received a questionnaire including 3 sets of images of real food product packaging (brand blinded), categorized by food groups: 8 cookies, 7 breakfast cereals, and 7 ready-to-eat meals, with the Nutri-Score 2.0 displayed on the front-of-pack of each product. First, they were asked which product they would intend to purchase in each category, and which product they thought to be the "healthiest". Then, participants were asked 1) to rank them according to their nutritional quality by identifying the first, the second and the third products with the best nutritional quality (in this order) and 2) to identify those that were ultra-processed. Last, a series of questions evaluated how participants of this arm perceived the Nutri-Score 2.0 and whether they found it helpful.

Treatment:

Other: Front-of-pack label NutriScore 2.0