Nutrition info and other front-of-package labels and simulated food and beverage purchases: a randomized clinical trial

Summary

This randomised controlled trial evaluated six front-of-package labelling systems for their capacity to influence healthier food purchases in a simulated online grocery environment with 5,636 US adults. Spectrum labels—which rate products on a continuum from least to most healthy—significantly outperformed both positive-only labels and FDA-proposed Nutrition Info labels in driving healthier purchasing decisions. The FDA's proposed Nutrition Info labels, High In labels, and their positive combinations showed no significant advantage over positive labels alone, suggesting that simpler interpretive rating systems may be more effective for consumer choice architecture than nutrient-of-concern flagging approaches.

Regional applicability

Although conducted in the United States, this trial is relevant to UK food policy and labelling debates. The study employed the UK's Ofcom Nutrient Profiling Model as the healthfulness metric, and findings on spectrum label effectiveness may inform ongoing discussions about front-of-package labelling standards in the United Kingdom and Europe. However, the US sample and simulated retail environment limit direct transferability to UK consumer behaviour and actual purchasing patterns.

Key measures

Ofcom Nutrient Profiling Model scores (0–100 scale; higher = healthier); average differential effect (ADE) between labelling conditions

Outcomes reported

The study compared the effectiveness of six front-of-package labelling systems on the healthfulness of simulated food and beverage purchases by US adults, measured using the UK Ofcom Nutrient Profiling Model. Spectrum labels resulted in significantly healthier purchases compared with positive-only and FDA-proposed Nutrition Info labels.

Topic tags