Pulse Brain · Growing Health Evidence Index
Tier 3 — Observational / field trialPeer-reviewed

Supermarket policies on less-healthy food at checkouts: Natural experimental evaluation using interrupted time series analyses of purchases

Ejlerskov KT [0000-0002-5408-8402]; Sharp SJ [0000-0003-2375-1440]; Stead M [0000-0002-3066-4604]; Adamson AJ; White M [0000-0002-1861-6757]; Adams J [0000-0002-5733-7830]

PLOS Medicine · 2018

Read source ↗ All evidence

Summary

BACKGROUND: In response to public concerns and campaigns, some United Kingdom supermarkets have implemented policies to reduce less-healthy food at checkouts. We explored the effects of these policies on purchases of less-healthy foods commonly displayed at checkouts. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used a natural experimental design and two data sources providing complementary and unique information. We analysed data on purchases of small packages of common, less-healthy, checkout foods (sugary confectionary, chocolate, and potato crisps) from 2013 to 2017 from nine UK supermarkets (Aldi, Asda, Co-op, Lidl, M&S, Morrisons, Sainsbury's, Tesco, and Waitrose). Six supermarkets implemented a checkout food policy between 2013 and 2017 and were considered intervention stores; the remainder were comparators. Firstly, we studied the longitudinal association between implementation of checkout policies and purchases taken home. We used data from a large (n ≈ 30,000) household purchase panel of food brought home to conduct controlled interrupted time series analyses of purchases of less-healthy common checkout foods from 12 months before to 12 months after implementation. We conducted separate analyses for each intervention supermarket, using others as comparators. We synthesised results across supermarkets using random effects meta-analyses. Implementation of a checkout food policy was associated with an immediate reduction in four-weekly purchases of common checkout foods of 157,000 (72,700-242,800) packages per percentage market share-equivalent to a 17.3% reduction. This decrease was sustained at 1 year with 185,100 (121,700-248,500) fewer packages purchased per 4 weeks per percentage market share-equivalent to a 15.5% reduction. The immediate, but not sustained, effect was robust to sensitivity analysis. Secondly, we studied the cross-sectional association between checkout food policies and purchases eaten without being taken home. We used data from a smaller (n ≈ 7,500) individual purchase panel of food bought and eaten 'on the go'. We conducted cross-sectional analyses comparing purchases of common checkout foods in 2016-2017 from supermarkets with and without checkout food policies. There were 76.4% (95% confidence interval 48.6%-89.1%) fewer annual purchases of less-healthy common checkout foods from supermarkets with versus without checkout food policies. The main limitations of the study are that we do not know where in the store purchases were selected and cannot determine the effect of changes in purchases on consumption. Other interventions may also have been responsible for the results seen. CONCLUSIONS: There is a potential impact of checkout food polices on purchases. Voluntary supermarket-led activities may have public health benefits.

Outcomes reported

Referenced by PLOS supermarket placement trial as citation 36; likely supports topic area: supermarket placement / food retail environment; obesity / chronic disease / public health. Topics: obesity / chronic disease / public health; supermarket placement / food retail environment Evidence type: Trial / experiment Source report: PLOS supermarket placement trial Ref#: PLOS supermarket placement trial #36 Original: Ejlerskov KT, Sharp SJ, Stead M, Adamson AJ, White M, Adams J. Supermarket policies on less-healthy food at checkouts: natural experimental evaluation using interrupted time series analyses of purchases. PLoS Med. 2018;15(12):e1002712. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002712 PMID: 30562349

Theme
Farming systems, soils & land use
Subject
Food & agricultural policy
Study type
Research
Source type
Peer-reviewed research
Status
Published
Geography
United Kingdom
System type
Other
DOI
10.1371/journal.pmed.1002712
Catalogue ID
IRmoq83umn-0887a0
Pulse AI · ask about this record

Dig deeper with Pulse AI.

Pulse AI has read the whole catalogue. Ask about this record, its theme, or how the findings apply to UK farming and policy — every answer cites the underlying studies.