Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This study evaluates the impact of culturally tailored menu labeling interventions on psychosocial factors and ordering behavior among customers in two independently owned Hispanic restaurants in East-Central Texas. Participants will be exposed to one of three sequential menu conditions at each restaurant: (1) a standard menu without nutrition information, (2) a paper menu with bilingual nutrition labels, or (3) a digital menu app enhanced with Augmented Reality (AR) and Artificial Intelligence (AI) providing interactive nutrition guidance. The study will assess whether menu formats influence nutrition literacy, decision-making confidence, self-efficacy, attitudes, behavioral intentions, and actual ordering behavior. Data will be collected through surveys, purchase receipts, and app interaction logs.
Detailed Description:
This study aims to design and evaluate a culturally tailored, bilingual menu labeling intervention incorporating AR and AI features in small, independently owned Hispanic restaurants. The intervention seeks to promote informed food ordering by targeting psychosocial constructs known to influence food choice. Three sequential conditions will be implemented: (1) baseline with standard menus and no nutrition labels, (2) paper menus with visible bilingual nutrition labels, and (3) a digital AR/AI-enhanced menu.
Guided by the Theory of Planned Behavior and Social Cognitive Theory, the study focuses on constructs such as decision-making confidence, self-efficacy, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. The two primary objectives are to (1) develop a culturally informed digital menu labeling tool and (2) evaluate its effectiveness compared with standard and paper menu formats in shaping psychosocial factors and actual ordering behavior.
Participants will be recruited during restaurant visits and exposed to the menu condition corresponding to their visit timing. Surveys will be administered before ordering to assess psychosocial factors, label awareness, and behavioral intentions. A formative needs assessment conducted prior to implementation will ensure cultural and linguistic appropriateness. Findings will provide evidence on the effectiveness of innovative, theory-informed digital interventions in promoting informed food choices in culturally specific restaurant settings not subject to federal nutrition labeling requirements.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline condition | No Intervention | Standard menu with no nutrition information. | |
| Paper menu condition | Active Comparator | Bilingual paper menus display numeric and icon-based nutrition information, including calories, saturated fat, and sodium. |
|
| AR/AI digital menu condition | Experimental | Mobile app providing interactive nutrition information and personalized guidance based on dietary preferences. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Paper menu | Behavioral | Paper menu with bilingual nutrition labels |
| |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Attitudes Toward Healthy Menu Choices | Attitudes toward selecting healthier menu items, assessed using a study-developed questionnaire informed by the Theory of Planned Behavior. The questionnaire consists of agreement-scale items evaluating whether choosing healthier foods is important, beneficial, and enjoyable. Measurement Tool: Study-developed Attitudes Toward Healthy Menu Choices Questionnaire (5-point agreement Likert scale) Scale Description and Coding:
Unit of Measure: Mean attitude score (range: 1 to 5) Scale Range and Direction: Scores range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate more positive attitudes toward choosing healthier menu items. | Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure) |
| Intention to Make Healthier Food Choices | Intention to choose healthier menu items, assessed using a study-developed questionnaire informed by the Theory of Planned Behavior. Measurement Tool: Study-developed Healthy Eating Intention Questionnaire (5-point agreement Likert scale) Scale Description and Coding:
Unit of Measure: Intention score (range: 1 to 5) Scale Range and Direction: Scores range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate stronger intention to choose healthier menu items. | Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure) |
| Perceived Behavioral Control Over Healthy Menu Choices | Perceived behavioral control over choosing healthier menu items, assessed using a study-developed questionnaire informed by the Theory of Planned Behavior. Measurement Tool: Study-developed Perceived Behavioral Control Questionnaire (5-point agreement Likert scale) Scale Description and Coding:
Unit of Measure: Perceived behavioral control score (range: 1 to 5) Scale Range and Direction: Scores range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate greater perceived control over choosing healthier menu items. | Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure) |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Total Energy Ordered per Customer Order | Total energy content of menu items ordered by each participant, calculated using receipt-based ordering data linked to laboratory-tested and standardized recipe-based nutrient analysis conducted as part of the Menu2Meal (M2M) intervention. Measurement Tool: Receipt-based nutrient calculation using laboratory-tested and standardized nutrient databases Unit of Measure: Mean kilocalories (kcal) per customer order |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Hyunjung Lee, PhD | Department of Nutrition, Texas A&M University | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Local Restaurant Site | Bryan | Texas | 77802 | United States |
De-identified individual participant data (IPD) underlying the results reported in the publication will be shared, including baseline characteristics, outcome measures, and adverse event data. Data will be available beginning 6 months after publication for researchers who provide a methodologically sound proposal. Requests should be submitted to the corresponding author and will require a data use agreement in accordance with institutional and regulatory policies.
IPD will be made available beginning approximately 6 months after publication of the primary results and will remain available for 2 years.
Researchers who wish to access the de-identified individual participant data (IPD) and supporting documents should submit a written request to the corresponding author. Requests must include a methodologically sound research proposal describing the intended analyses and purpose of data use. Access will be granted to qualified researchers upon approval of the proposal and execution of a data use agreement in accordance with Texas A&M University and applicable regulatory requirements. Data will be transferred using a secure institutional data-sharing platform.
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D005247 | Feeding Behavior |
| D009765 | Obesity |
| D003924 | Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 |
| D002318 | Cardiovascular Diseases |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D001522 | Behavior, Animal |
| D001519 | Behavior |
| D050177 | Overweight |
| D044343 | Overnutrition |
Not provided
Not provided
This study uses a within-site, quasi-experimental design at two independently owned Hispanic restaurants. The intervention consists of three sequential conditions: (1) a baseline phase with the standard menu, (2) a paper menu phase featuring bilingual nutrition labels, and (3) a digital menu phase using a mobile app enhanced with augmented reality (AR) and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. Each condition enrolls distinct participants to compare the effects of different menu labeling formats on ordering behavior and psychosocial outcomes. The restaurants serve as their own controls, allowing for direct comparison of menu formats within the same real-world setting.
Not provided
Not provided
Participants in this study will be partially blinded to the specific aims of the intervention to minimize bias. While they will be aware they are participating in a study about menu use and food choices, they will not be informed of the detailed differences or hypotheses related to the nutrition labeling formats to reduce influence on their ordering behavior. Research staff collecting data will also be trained to maintain neutrality, but full masking is not possible due to the visible differences in menu formats across study phases.
Not provided
| Digital menu condition |
| Behavioral |
AR/AI-enhanced digital menu giving interactive nutrition guidance |
|
| Self-Efficacy for Using Nutrition Information When Ordering | Self-efficacy for using nutrition information to guide food choices, assessed using a study-developed questionnaire informed by Social Cognitive Theory. Measurement Tool: Study-developed Nutrition Information Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (5-point agreement Likert scale) Scale Description and Coding:
Unit of Measure: Mean self-efficacy score (range: 1 to 5) Scale Range and Direction: Scores range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate greater confidence in using nutrition information to make food choices. | Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure) |
| Awareness of Nutrition Information on the Menu | Awareness of nutrition information on the menu, assessed using a study-developed self-report item asking whether the participant noticed or looked at nutrition information while viewing the menu. Measurement Tool: Study-developed Awareness of Nutrition Information Item (binary response) Scale Description and Coding: 0 = No, did not notice or look at nutrition information 1 = Yes, noticed or looked at nutrition information Unit of Measure: Percentage of participants reporting awareness (response = 1) Scale Range and Direction: Values range from 0 to 1. A value of 1 indicates awareness of nutrition information. How the Percentage Is Derived: The percentage is calculated as the proportion of participants with a response of 1 (Yes) among all participants who completed the questionnaire. | Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure) |
| Use of Nutrition Information to Inform Menu Selection | Use of nutrition information to inform menu selection, assessed using a study-developed self-report item asking the extent to which nutrition information influenced the participant's food choice. Measurement Tool: Study-developed Nutrition Information Influence Item (5-point Likert scale) Scale Description and Coding:
Unit of Measure: Percentage of participants reporting use of nutrition information, defined as responses of 4 or 5 Scale Range and Direction: Scores range from 1 to 5. Higher values indicate greater influence of nutrition information on choice. How the Percentage Is Derived: The percentage is calculated as the proportion of participants with responses of 4 or 5 among all participants who completed the questionnaire. | Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure) |
| Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure) |
| Saturated Fat Content of Menu Items Ordered | Total saturated fat content of menu items ordered by each participant, calculated by summing grams of saturated fat from all items ordered, using laboratory-tested and standardized recipe-based nutrient values. Measurement Tool: Receipt-based nutrient calculation using laboratory-tested and standardized nutrient databases Unit of Measure: Mean grams (g) of saturated fat per customer order | Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure) |
| Sodium Content of Menu Items Ordered | Total sodium content of menu items ordered by each participant, calculated by summing milligrams of sodium from all items ordered, using laboratory-tested and standardized recipe-based nutrient values. Measurement Tool: Receipt-based nutrient calculation using laboratory-tested and standardized nutrient databases Unit of Measure: Mean milligrams (mg) of sodium per customer order | Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure) |
| Dietary Fiber Content of Menu Items Ordered | Total dietary fiber content of menu items ordered by each participant, calculated by summing grams of dietary fiber from all items ordered, using laboratory-tested and standardized recipe-based nutrient values. Measurement Tool: Receipt-based nutrient calculation using laboratory-tested and standardized nutrient databases Unit of Measure: Mean grams (g) of dietary fiber per customer order | Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure) |
| Added Sugar Content of Menu Items Ordered | Total added sugar content of menu items ordered by each participant, calculated by summing grams of added sugars from all items ordered, using laboratory-tested and standardized recipe-based nutrient values. Measurement Tool: Receipt-based nutrient calculation using laboratory-tested and standardized nutrient databases Unit of Measure: Mean grams (g) of added sugars per customer order | Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure) |
| D009748 |
| Nutrition Disorders |
| D009750 | Nutritional and Metabolic Diseases |
| D001835 | Body Weight |
| D012816 | Signs and Symptoms |
| D013568 | Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |
| D003920 | Diabetes Mellitus |
| D044882 | Glucose Metabolism Disorders |
| D008659 | Metabolic Diseases |
| D004700 | Endocrine System Diseases |