Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT01626729
NCT01626729CompletedNot Applicable

Facts-Up-Front Versus Traffic-Light Food Labels: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Yale University1 site in 1 country703 target enrollmentStarted: May 1, 2011Last updated:
Conditions
Interventions

Trial Snapshot

Phase
Not Applicable
Status
Completed
Enrollment
703
Locations
1
Primary Endpoint
Nutrient Comparison and Nutrient Level Estimation Accuracy

Study Overview

Brief Summary

The U.S. food and beverage industry recently released a new front-of-package nutrition labeling system called Facts Up Front that will be used on thousands of food products. The purpose of this study was to test consumer understanding of the Facts Up Front nutrition labeling system compared to the Multiple Traffic Light system (Traffic Light). Facts Up Front displays grams/milligrams and % daily value information for various nutrients; Traffic Light uses an interpretive color-coded scheme to alert consumers to low, medium or high levels of certain nutrients. Participants in an Internet-based study were randomized to one of five front-of-package label conditions: 1) No Label; 2) Traffic Light; 3) Traffic Light plus information about protein and fiber (Traffic Light+); 4) Facts Up Front; or 5) Facts Up Front plus information about "nutrients to encourage" (Facts Up Front+). Total percentage correct quiz scores were generated reflecting participants' ability to compare two foods on nutrient levels, based on their labels, and to estimate amounts of saturated fat, sugar, sodium, fiber and protein in foods. 703 adult participants recruited through an online database in May 2011 participated in this Internet-based study and data were analyzed in June 2011. The investigators hypothesized that the Traffic Light label groups would perform better than the Facts Up Front groups on all outcomes.

Study Design

Study Type
Interventional
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention Model
Parallel
Primary Purpose
Prevention
Masking
None

Eligibility Criteria

Ages
18 Years to — (Adult, Older Adult)
Sex
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No

Inclusion Criteria

  • •Participants in Survey Sampling International Panels

Exclusion Criteria

  • •Younger than 18 years old

Arms & Interventions

Facts Up Front

Experimental

Intervention: Facts Up Front (Behavioral)

Facts Up Front+

Experimental

Intervention: Facts Up Front+ (Behavioral)

No front of package label

Placebo Comparator

Intervention: No label control group (Behavioral)

Traffic Light+

Experimental

Intervention: Traffic Light+ (Behavioral)

Traffic Light

Experimental

Intervention: Traffic Light (Behavioral)

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Nutrient Comparison and Nutrient Level Estimation Accuracy

Time Frame: Baseline

Participants took a nutrient level comparison quiz asking them to identify which of two products presented side-by-side in the same food category were higher or lower in different nutrients. Participants also viewed 8 individual products and estimated whether the product had low, medium or high amounts of saturated fat, sugar, sodium, fiber, and protein. The primary outcomes were total percentage correct on these quizzes.

Perceptions of Health, Taste and Purchase Intent

Time Frame: Baseline

Participants rated how healthy they thought each individual product was, how good it would taste and their likelihood to buy the product for themselves and their children (answered only by those who reported having children) using a 9-point Likert scale. Each set of ratings was averaged across eight products.

Secondary Outcomes

  • Consumer Label Preferences(Baseline)

Investigators

Sponsor Class
Other
Responsible Party
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigator

Christina Roberto

Principal Investigator

Yale University

Study Sites (1)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials