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

NCT ID: NCT05610930

Last Updated: 2023-05-12

Basic Information

• Recruitment Status: COMPLETED
• Clinical Phase: NA
• Total Enrollment: 21159 participants
• Study Classification: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Start Date: 2022-05-01
• Study Completion Date: 2022-07-07

Brief Summary

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.

Detailed 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.

Conditions

Objective Understanding of Nutritional Label

Study Design

• Allocation Method: RANDOMIZED
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Primary Study Purpose: OTHER
• Blinding Strategy: SINGLE

Study Groups

Control arm

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.

Group Type: NO_INTERVENTION

No interventions assigned to this group

Experimental arm

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.

Group Type: EXPERIMENTAL

Front-of-pack label NutriScore 2.0

Intervention Type: OTHER

Participants in the experimental arm can see, in case the product is ultra-processed, a black banner surrounding the Nutri-Score, with the word "ultra-transformé", meaning ultra-processed, and no black banner otherwise. Participants in the control arm had no label at all. The intervention (the Nutri-Score 2.0) was added on the packaging on the products included in the 3 sets of images that participants recieved via the questionnaire.

Interventions

Front-of-pack label NutriScore 2.0

Participants in the experimental arm can see, in case the product is ultra-processed, a black banner surrounding the Nutri-Score, with the word "ultra-transformé", meaning ultra-processed, and no black banner otherwise. Participants in the control arm had no label at all. The intervention (the Nutri-Score 2.0) was added on the packaging on the products included in the 3 sets of images that participants recieved via the questionnaire.

Intervention Type: OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

Enrolled in the NutriNet-Santé cohort

Exclusion Criteria

None

• Minimum Eligible Age: 18 Years
• Maximum Eligible Age: 99 Years
• Eligible Sex: ALL
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes

Sponsors

University of Paris 13

OTHER

Sponsor Role: lead

Responsible Party

Bernard Srour

Epidemiologist

Responsibility Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Bernard Srour, PhD, PharmD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Institut National de la Santé Et de la Recherche Médicale, France

Locations

Equipe de recherche en Epidémiologie nutritionnelle

Bobigny, , France

Countries

France

References

Srour B, Hercberg S, Galan P, Monteiro CA, Szabo de Edelenyi F, Bourhis L, Fialon M, Sarda B, Druesne-Pecollo N, Esseddik Y, Deschasaux-Tanguy M, Julia C, Touvier M. Effect of a new graphically modified Nutri-Score on the objective understanding of foods' nutrient profile and ultraprocessing: a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Nutr Prev Health. 2023 Jun;6(1):108-118. doi: 10.1136/bmjnph-2022-000599. Epub 2023 Jun 8.

Reference Type: DERIVED

PMID: 37484539 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

UParis13-BS

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id