Not provided
| ID | Type | Description | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1R01DK136779-01 | U.S. NIH Grant/Contract | View source |
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
Unhealthy diets significantly contribute to major preventable chronic diseases including type 2 diabetes, obesity, heart disease and stroke, which disproportionally impact racial/ethnic minority groups and those with lower income [1-3]. Although taxes and warning labels targeting sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB) have been successful at shifting behavior [4-7], there are many other ultra-processed food products that contribute to unhealthy diets [8]. What is less well-known is whether a suite of healthy food policies that are expanded to target a range of ultra-processed foods can shift dietary choices and intake in meaningful ways. Our research team's long-term goal is to identify and understand the degree to which combinations of healthy food policies can improve nutrition security and reduce nutrition-related diseases.
To advance our understanding of policies needed to support nutrition security and health, our overall objective is to examine the degree to which a suite of healthy food policies in online food retailers can increase the purchase and intake of healthy foods and beverages while reducing the purchase and intake of unhealthy ultra-processed foods and beverages.
To accomplish this objective, we will use an innovative online grocery store and restaurant platforms to randomize participants to either: 1) control (no taxes, warning labels, or healthy checkout regulations on any products); or 2) a suite of healthy food policies (ultra-processed food and beverage taxes, front-of-pack nutrition labeling, and healthy check out regulations that restrict the promotion of ultra-processed products on the checkout page). We will recruit 300 adults with lower income across Houston and San Antonio, TX, and Philadelphia, PA to shop once per week for six weeks in both our online grocery store and restaurant. Week 1 will be a baseline (control) week without interventions, followed by three weeks of the interventions. In the last two study weeks, we will introduce unhealthy food marketing (e.g., banner ads) into the online platforms to mimic what we expect industry will do to counter public health policy efforts.
A key aim of the study is to simulate how food companies will respond to healthy eating policies if they were to be implemented in the real world. For that reason, we will increase the intensity of non-checkout advertisements for unhealthy foods during the last two weeks of the intervention period because this is likely how industry would respond in the real-world if the U.S. adopted any of the policies we are testing. Therefore, we are trying to measure the extent to which that advertising would undermine the policy effects. This is a critical component of our study because many nutrition policy experiments look at the impact of a policy in a static situation that does not account for a likely industry response. The advertisements we are using will mimic what's normally seen in delivery/grocery apps such as ads for sugar-sweetened beverages like Coke or Pepsi.
Participants will be given money to spend in these online platforms and purchases will be delivered to them via a real food retail store and restaurant. Participants will complete surveys at baseline and after 6 weeks of shopping and will complete two dietary recalls administered over the phone during the baseline week and during the fourth week (4 recalls total). The rationale underlying the proposed research is based on our work showing that beverage taxes and warning labels greatly reduce SSB purchases.
The specific aims of the study are:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control | No Intervention | ||
| Intervention | Experimental |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Suite of healthy food policies | Behavioral | A suite of healthy food policies in an online restaurant and grocery store including ultra-processed food and beverage taxes, front-of-pack nutrition labeling, and healthy check out regulations that restrict the promotion of ultra-processed products on the checkout pages. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Average kcals purchased per participant per day from unhealthy ultra-processed food products that are targeted by our suite of healthy food policies | We will sum the number of kcals from ultra-processed food products purchased in the online grocery store and divide that by the number of people in the household and 7 days per week. We will then add that to the number of kcals from ultra-processed foods purchased from the online restaurant to calculate total kcals from ultra-processed foods purchased per study participant per day. We will also examine these outcomes separately in the grocery store and restaurant context. | Change between baseline and Weeks 2-4 (Aim 1) and Weeks 5-6 (Aim 3) |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Average sodium, saturated fat, and added sugars purchased per participant per day from unhealthy ultra-processed food products that are targeted by our suite of policies | Using the same approach as our primary outcome, our secondary behavioral outcomes will be the average sodium, saturated fat, and added sugars purchased per participant per day. We will also examine these outcomes separately in the grocery store and restaurant context. |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
For participants living in the Houston or San Antonio areas, their household income must be greater than 165% of the federal poverty level, but less than the Texas state median household income (based on the 2023 American Community Survey) for their household size [11].
For participants living in the Philadelphia area, their income must be greater than 200% of the federal poverty level, but less than the Pennsylvania state median household income (based on the 2023 American Community Survey) for their household size [11].
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Julianna Catania, MPH | Contact | (215) 839-9689 | julianna.catania@pennmedicine.upenn.edu | |
| Eva Fabian, MPH | Contact | Eva.Fabian@Pennmedicine.upenn.edu |
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Christina Roberto, PhD | University of Pennsylvania | Principal Investigator |
| Pasquale Rummo, PhD, MPH | NYU Langone Health | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| University of Pennsylvania | Recruiting | Philadelphia | Pennsylvania | 19104 | United States |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 29634829 | Background | US Burden of Disease Collaborators; Mokdad AH, Ballestros K, Echko M, Glenn S, Olsen HE, Mullany E, Lee A, Khan AR, Ahmadi A, Ferrari AJ, Kasaeian A, Werdecker A, Carter A, Zipkin B, Sartorius B, Serdar B, Sykes BL, Troeger C, Fitzmaurice C, Rehm CD, Santomauro D, Kim D, Colombara D, Schwebel DC, Tsoi D, Kolte D, Nsoesie E, Nichols E, Oren E, Charlson FJ, Patton GC, Roth GA, Hosgood HD, Whiteford HA, Kyu H, Erskine HE, Huang H, Martopullo I, Singh JA, Nachega JB, Sanabria JR, Abbas K, Ong K, Tabb K, Krohn KJ, Cornaby L, Degenhardt L, Moses M, Farvid M, Griswold M, Criqui M, Bell M, Nguyen M, Wallin M, Mirarefin M, Qorbani M, Younis M, Fullman N, Liu P, Briant P, Gona P, Havmoller R, Leung R, Kimokoti R, Bazargan-Hejazi S, Hay SI, Yadgir S, Biryukov S, Vollset SE, Alam T, Frank T, Farid T, Miller T, Vos T, Barnighausen T, Gebrehiwot TT, Yano Y, Al-Aly Z, Mehari A, Handal A, Kandel A, Anderson B, Biroscak B, Mozaffarian D, Dorsey ER, Ding EL, Park EK, Wagner G, Hu G, Chen H, Sunshine JE, Khubchandani J, Leasher J, Leung J, Salomon J, Unutzer J, Cahill L, Cooper L, Horino M, Brauer M, Breitborde N, Hotez P, Topor-Madry R, Soneji S, Stranges S, James S, Amrock S, Jayaraman S, Patel T, Akinyemiju T, Skirbekk V, Kinfu Y, Bhutta Z, Jonas JB, Murray CJL. The State of US Health, 1990-2016: Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Among US States. JAMA. 2018 Apr 10;319(14):1444-1472. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.0158. | |
| Background | Centers for Disease Control. Type 2 Diabetes. Centers for Disease Control. Published December 16, 2021. Accessed September 30, 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/basics/type2.html#:~:text=Healthy%20eating%20is%20your%20recipe,them%20have%20type%202%20diabetes. |
Not provided
Not provided
De-identified data available for public use and associated documentation will be available to the research community free of charge through the Data Sharing for Demographic Research (DSDR) data repository hosted at ICPSR. Data and datasets will be kept and available to share for at least three years following completion of the project, in accordance with NIH regulations. Datasets in DSDR will be findable and identifiable through a study digital object identifier (DOI) minted by ICPSR.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D002908 | Chronic Disease |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D020969 | Disease Attributes |
| D010335 | Pathologic Processes |
| D013568 | Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Change between baseline and Weeks 2-4 (Aim 1) and Weeks 5-6 (Aim 3) |
| Average overall kcals, sodium, saturated fat, and added sugars from all foods purchased in the online grocery store and restaurant per participant per day | We will create this outcome using the same approach as our primary outcome, except we will look at all foods and beverages purchased, not just ultra-processed foods and beverages. We will also examine these outcomes separately in the grocery store and restaurant context. | Change between baseline and Weeks 2-4 (Aim 1) and Weeks 5-6 (Aim 3) |
| Percentage of total dollars per order spent on products targeted by our suite of healthy food policies | To create this outcome for each week of the study, we will divide the number of dollars spent on targeted ultra-processed products by the total dollars spent and multiply by 100. | Change between baseline and Weeks 2-4 (Aim 1) and Weeks 5-6 (Aim 3) |
| Total dollars spent on food and beverage products purchased outside of the study grocery store and restaurant | We will sum together the total amount of dollars spent on food and beverages purchased outside the study using outside receipts submitted by the participants. | Baseline to Week 6 |
| Total dollars spent on sugar sweetened beverages, candy, and fast food purchased outside of the study grocery store and restaurant | Total dollars spent on sugar sweetened beverages, candy, and fast food purchased outside the study using outside receipts submitted by the participants. | Baseline to Week 6 |
| Healthy Eating Index Score (HEI-2020) | The HEI is a tool to assess how well a participant's diet aligns with the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans and can be used to measure the efficacy of nutrition interventions [9]. We will average intake estimates from the two 24-hour dietary recall interviews conducted at baseline and again at follow up (Week 4). | Change between baseline and Week 4 |
| Change in usual intake for: energy (kcals), discretionary calories, SSB servings per day, total fruit servings/day, total vegetable servings/day, daily intake of key macronutrients, and daily intake of whole grains | We will average intake estimates from the two NDSR 24-hour dietary recall interviews conducted at baseline and again at follow up (Week 4) [10]. | Change between baseline and Week 4 |
| Food and beverage product perceptions | During the final survey (Week 7), participants will view four ultra-processed products. Those in the intervention group will see those products with any applicable warning labels and those in the control group will see the same products without any warning labels. Participants will then rate how healthy or unhealthy they believe the product to be. | Final survey (administered Week 7) |
| Nutrient content knowledge | During the final survey (Week 7), participants will also be asked about their knowledge of different nutrients of concern, and we will determine whether they provide the correct answer or not. They will view the same four ultra-processed products as the food and beverage product perceptions questions and be asked whether or not the product has low, medium, or high amounts of calories, sodium, saturated fats, and added sugars. | Final survey (administered Week 7) |
| Warning label perceptions | At the end of the final study survey (Week 7), participants will be shown the warning labels used in the study and asked about perceived message effectiveness. | Final survey (administered Week 7) |
| Policy opinions | During the final survey (Week 7), participants will also answer four questions about their support or opposition for the suite of healthy food policies. | Final survey (administered Week 7) |
| Online store perceptions | We will assess the acceptability of the online grocery store and restaurant (e.g., overall difficulty of using the grocery store/restaurant, satisfaction with number of options) and realism of the online grocery store and restaurant (e.g., extent to which participants' selections are similar to usual purchases, extent to which it felt real). | Final survey (administered Week 7) |
| Background | Centers for Disease Control. Adult obesity facts. Centers for Disease Control. Published May 17, 2022. Accessed September 30, 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/adult.html |
| 35648398 | Background | Andreyeva T, Marple K, Marinello S, Moore TE, Powell LM. Outcomes Following Taxation of Sugar-Sweetened Beverages: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Jun 1;5(6):e2215276. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.15276. |
| 33059917 | Background | An R, Liu J, Liu R, Barker AR, Figueroa RB, McBride TD. Impact of Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Warning Labels on Consumer Behaviors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Am J Prev Med. 2021 Jan;60(1):115-126. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2020.07.003. Epub 2020 Oct 12. |
| 32515697 | Background | Clarke N, Pechey E, Kosite D, Konig LM, Mantzari E, Blackwell AKM, Marteau TM, Hollands GJ. Impact of health warning labels on selection and consumption of food and alcohol products: systematic review with meta-analysis. Health Psychol Rev. 2021 Sep;15(3):430-453. doi: 10.1080/17437199.2020.1780147. Epub 2020 Jul 2. |
| 32433660 | Background | Grummon AH, Hall MG. Sugary drink warnings: A meta-analysis of experimental studies. PLoS Med. 2020 May 20;17(5):e1003120. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003120. eCollection 2020 May. |
| 26526253 | Background | Dong D, Bilger M, van Dam RM, Finkelstein EA. Consumption Of Specific Foods And Beverages And Excess Weight Gain Among Children And Adolescents. Health Aff (Millwood). 2015 Nov;34(11):1940-8. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2015.0434. |
| Background | How the HEI is scored. Food and Nutrition Service U.S. Department of Agriculture. (n.d.). https://www.fns.usda.gov/cnpp/how-hei-scored |
| Background | University of Minnesota Nutrition Coordinating Center (NCC). NDSR Software. Nutrition Coordinating Center (NCC). Published July 25, 2025. Accessed August 6, 2025. https://www.ncc.umn.edu/products/ |
| Background | U.S. Census Bureau (2023). Median Household Income in the Past 12 Months (In 2023 Inflation-adjusted Dollars) by Household Size American Community Survey 1-year estimates. Retrieved from <https://censusreporter.org> |