Cited by 305Consumer Attitudes and Food LabelingConsumer Packaging Perceptions and TrendsConsumer behavior in food and health

Impact of front-of-pack 'traffic-light' nutrition labelling on consumer food purchases in the UK

Sacks, G., Rayner, M., Swinburn, B.·2009·Health Promotion International

Abstract

Front-of-pack 'traffic-light' nutrition labelling has been widely proposed as a tool to improve public health nutrition. This study examined changes to consumer food purchases after the introduction of traffic-light labels with the aim of assessing the impact of the labels on the 'healthiness' of foods purchased. The study examined sales data from a major UK retailer in 2007. We analysed products in two categories ('ready meals' and sandwiches), investigating the percentage change in sales 4 weeks before and after traffic-light labels were introduced, and taking into account seasonality, product promotions and product life-cycle. We investigated whether changes in sales were related to the healthiness of products. All products that were not new and not on promotion immediately before or after the introduction of traffic-light labels were selected for the analysis (n = 6 for ready meals and n = 12 for sandwiches). For the selected ready-meals, sales increased (by 2.4% of category sales) in the 4 weeks after the introduction of traffic-light labels, whereas sales of the selected sandwiches did not change significantly. Critically, there was no association between changes in product sales and the healthiness of the products. This short-term study based on a small number of ready meals and sandwiches found that the introduction of a system of four traffic-light labels had no discernable effect on the relative healthiness of consumer purchases. Further research on the influence of nutrition signposting will be needed before this labelling format can be considered a promising public health intervention.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/heapro/dap032

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sacks, G., Rayner, M., & Swinburn, B.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • British Heart Foundation (GB)
  • Deakin University (AU)
Venue
Health Promotion International
Published
2009-10-08
Volume
24
Issue
4
Pages
344-352
ISSN
  • 0957-4824 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2245
OpenAlex
W2120025431
Cited by
305
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 22
FWCI
15.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Health Promotion International (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Deakin Research Online (Deakin University) (submittedVersion)
  • Oxford University Research Archive (ORA) (University of Oxford) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Packaging Perceptions and Trends
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Consumer behavior in food and health
Keywords
front-of-pack labeling, traffic light labels, food sales, ready-to-eat meals, sandwiches, food health, public health nutrition, food retail
MeSH terms
Food Labeling, Food Preferences, United Kingdom, Health Promotion, Humans, Nutritive Value, Health Behavior, Fast Foods

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review