How far can reformulation participate in improving the nutritional quality of diets at population level? A modelling study using real food market data in France.

BACKGROUND: Food reformulation is promoted as a tool to improve the nutritional quality of population diets. However, the potential impact of industry-wide reformulation on dietary intake has been investigated minimally. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to estimate the impact on the French population nutrient intakes of industry-wide reformulation towards healthier products using the updated nutrient profiling system underpinning the front-of-pack nutrition label Nutri-Score (uNS-NPS). METHODS: Dietary data were retrieved from the Nutrinet-Santé cohort at baseline (N=100 418), providing detailed information regarding participants' food choices (N>3000 generic food items). Each individual food from 24 hours dietary record was matched with French food market data from OpenFoodFacts database (N=119 073 products). Three scenarios were constructed using nutrient content of currently existing food products: (1) all products available (baseline situation); (2) only existing products of better nutritional quality were available as potential substitutes and (3) only existing products of poorer quality were available. The assessment of the nutritional quality was based on the uNS-NPS score. Finally, dietary intakes were calculated for each scenario after random attribution of healthier/less healthy products as dietary choices. Monte-Carlo iterations (n=300) were conducted to generate uncertainty intervals. RESULTS: After simulation of reformulation using scenario 2, reduction in daily intake in comparison with the baseline situation was observed for energy (-55 kcal/day, -2.9%), saturated fat (-2.4g/day, -7.6%), sugar (-4.8g/day, -5.3%) and salt (-0.54g/day, -8.3%) and increase was observed for fibre (+1.0g/day, +4.9%). Improvements in diet quality were observed regardless of the overall quality of diet. The most important contributors to diet improvement were the followings: (1) sugars: sugary products, sweet bakery products and dairy products; (2) saturated fat: sweet bakery products, dairy products and prepared dishes and (3) salt: bread, prepared dishes, vegetable preparations and soups. CONCLUSION: Widespread reformulation of food offer appeared to be an opportunity for improving nutritional status at population level in France.

Understanding the influence of stakeholders on the implementation of front-of-pack nutrition labelling in the absence of public debate: the case of Portugal.

In the context of the European Commission's proposal for the harmonization of front-of-pack nutrition labels (FoPLs) across the European Union scheduled for 2023, Portugal's position on the preferred format to be adopted remains unclear. Our study aims to (1) describe the context of the political decision regarding FoPL's implementation in Portugal, (2) identify and characterize the actors involved in the debate and (3) evaluate their influence in the decision-making process and their position on the various formats of FoPLs considered. A document review complemented by a qualitative study with eight experts revealed the actors involved in the implementation of FoPLs in Portugal. The stakeholder theory was used to qualify their level of influence on the decision. To complement the experts' analysis, the views of 1014 Portuguese consumers on stakeholders' influence were collected via an online questionnaire. The results show a strong mobilization of the Portuguese Ministry of Health on the issue through the production of several technical and scientific reports. The background of the political decision related to FoPLs in Portugal highlights the commitment of some influential stakeholders in favour of the traffic light format, including one of the major Portuguese retailers, Continente. Nevertheless, in the face of public support for the Nutri-Score from a growing number of actors, Portugal has not yet adopted a specific format, partly due to some resistance from the agricultural sector. Portugal, by lack of consensus and agenda setting, is now awaiting formal harmonization of FoPLs by the European Commission. This study provides useful insights for public policy actors when promoting interventional measures.

Effect of a new graphically modified Nutri-Score on the objective understanding of foods' nutrient profile and ultraprocessing: a randomised controlled trial.

Introduction: When considering health-related impacts of foods, nutrient profile and (ultra)processing are two complementary dimensions. The Nutri-Score informs on the nutrient profile dimension. Recently, mounting evidence linked ultraprocessed food consumption to various adverse health outcomes, independently of their nutrient profile. To inform consumers about each of these health-related dimensions of food, we tested, in a randomised controlled trial, if a graphically modified version 'Nutri-Score V.2.0', including a black 'ultraprocessed' banner, would improve the capacity of consumers to rank products according to their nutrient profile and to detect those ultra-processed, compared with a no-label situation. Methods: 21 159 participants included in the NutriNet-Santé web-cohort were randomly assigned to a control arm (no front-of-pack label) or an experimental arm (Nutri-Score 2.0) and were presented an online questionnaire with three sets of food products (cookies, breakfast cereals and ready-to-eat meals) to rank according to nutrient profile and to identify ultraprocessed foods. The primary outcome was objective understanding of nutrient profile and ultraprocessing, represented by a score of correct answers. Secondary outcomes were purchasing intentions and the healthiest-perceived product. Multinomial logistic regressions were performed. Results: The Nutri-Score V.2.0 increased the objective understanding of both the nutrient profile dimension (OR highest vs lowest score category=29.0 (23.4-35.9), p<0.001) and the ultraprocessing dimension (OR=174.3 (151.4-200.5), p<0.001). Trends were similar for cookies, breakfast cereals and ready-to-eat meals. The Nutri-Score V.2.0 had a positive effect on purchasing intentions and on the products perceived as the healthiest. Conclusion: This randomised controlled trial demonstrates the interest of a front-of-pack label combining the Nutri-Score (informing on the nutrient profile dimension) with an additional graphic mention, indicating when the food is ultraprocessed, compared with a no-label situation. Our results show that a combined label enabled participants to independently understand these two complementary dimensions of foods. Trial registration number: NCT05610930.

Comparative understanding and preference of Nutri-Score and NutrInform Battery in a sample of Spanish consumers.

BACKGROUND: Interpretive front-of-pack labels (FoPLs) are supported by World Health Organization as an important policy tool to promote healthy diets. At present, various FoPLs formats co-exist in the European Union (EU). However, as part of the Farm to Fork strategy published in 2020, the European Commission stated that it would propose a single mandatory FoPL. The aim of this study was to analyze Spanish consumers' preference and objective understanding of Nutri-Score and NutrInform, two FoPLs that are currently the subject of debate in the EU. METHODS: In a representative sample of 1026 Spanish adults (50% women, mean age ± SD = 46 ± 14 years), objective understanding was assessed by asking participants to identify the healthiest food products in three food categories (breakfast products, breakfast cereals and added fats). The preference dimensions were tested by asking participants about the perceived helpfulness of the FoPL in discriminating the nutritional quality of food products (subjective understanding) and their overall assessment of the FoPL's ease of use, informativeness, trust and liking (perception). RESULTS: In terms of objective understanding, Nutri-Score was significantly associated with an increase in consumers' ability to identify healthier food products across all food categories compared with NutrInform [OR (odds ratio) = 19.1 [14.2-25.7], P < 0.0001]. On the preference dimension, Nutri-Score was perceived as significantly easier to use and was more liked than NutrInform (standardized principal component analysis dimension, respectively, 0.32 ± 1.58 vs. -0.29 ± 1.66, P < 0.0001 and 0.080 ± 1.18 vs. -0.072 ± 1.17, P = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides new evidence to support Nutri-Score in comparison with NutrInform in Spanish consumers, on both objective understanding and preference aspects.

Respective contribution of ultra-processing and nutritional quality of foods to the overall diet quality: results from the NutriNet-Santé study.

BACKGROUND: Both the nutritional quality of the foods consumed (as nutrient composition) and their ultra-processed nature have been linked to health risks. However, the respective contribution of each of these correlated dimensions or their synergy to the overall diet quality has been rarely explored. OBJECTIVE: To identify the respective effects of the nutritional quality of the foods consumed, the ultra-processed nature of foods and their cross-effect contributing to the overall quality of the diet. DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study. SETTING: Web-based French NutriNet-Santé cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Participants in the NutriNet-Santé cohort study with at least three available 24 h records as baseline dietary data (N = 98 454 participants). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The overall quality of the diet (qualified using the adherence to the 2017 French national nutrition and health dietary recommendations dietary score PNNS-GS2) was broken down into: (1) an effect of the nutritional quality of the foods consumed (qualified using the modified Foods Standards Agency nutrient profile model (underlying the Nutri-Score) dietary index FSAm-NPS DI); (2) an effect of the ultra-processed nature of the foods consumed (qualified using the proportion of ultra-processed foods consumed UPFp using the NOVA classification), and (3) a cross-effect of both dimensions. RESULTS: The overall effect from the 'nutritional quality of the foods consumed' (FSAm-NPS DI) was 1.10, corresponding to 26% of the total effect; the overall effect from ultra-processed foods consumption was 1.29, corresponding to 30% of the total effect; and cross-effect between nutritional quality of the foods consumed and ultra-processing was at 1.91, corresponding to 44% of total effects. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides support to the postulate that nutritional quality and ultra-processing should be considered as two correlated but distinct and complementary dimensions of the diet.

Nutri-Score and NutrInform Battery: Effects on Performance and Preference in Italian Consumers.

In May 2020, the European Commission announced a proposal for a mandatory front-of-pack label (FoPL) for all European Union (EU) countries. Indeed, FoPLs have been recognized by several public institutions as a cost-effective measure to guide consumers toward nutritionally favorable food products. The aim of this study was to compare the performance and consumer preference of two FoPLs currently proposed or implemented in EU countries, the interpretive format Nutri-Score and the non-interpretive format NutrInform Battery, among Italian consumers. The experimental study was conducted in 2021 on a representative sample of 1064 Italian adults (mean age = 46.5 ± 14.1 years; 48% men). Participants were randomized to either Nutri-Score or NutrInform and had to fill out an online questionnaire testing their objective understanding of the FoPL on three food categories (breakfast products, breakfast cereals and added fats) as well as purchase intention, subjective understanding and perception. Multivariable logistic regressions and t-tests were used to analyze the answers. In terms of the capacity of participants to identify the most nutritionally favorable products, Nutri-Score outperformed NutrInform in all food categories, with the highest odds ratio being observed for added fats (OR = 21.7 [15.3−31.1], p < 0.0001). Overall, with Nutri-Score, Italian participants were more likely to intend to purchase nutritionally favorable products than with NutrInform (OR = 5.29 [4.02−6.97], p < 0.0001). Focusing on olive oil, participants of the Nutri-Score group had higher purchase intention of olive oil compared to those in the NutrInform group (OR = 1.92 [1.42−2.60], p < 0.0001) after manipulating the label. The interpretive format Nutri-Score appears to be a more efficient tool than NutrInform for orienting Italian consumers towards more nutritionally favorable food choices.

Legitimacy of Front-of-Pack Nutrition Labels: Controversy Over the Deployment of the Nutri-Score in Italy.

BACKGROUND: Front-of-pack nutrition labels (FoPLs) aim at increasing transparency and consumers' awareness of the nutritional composition of pre-packed food products in order to improve the nutritional quality of their food choices. Nevertheless, the legitimacy of the Nutri-Score - the FoPL officially adopted in France and several other European countries - is subject to both technical and political controversy, particularly in Italy. In this study, we investigated how and by whom the legitimacy of the Nutri-Score, recognized by several institutional authorities, could be deconstructed within a specific system of norms, values and beliefs among Italian stakeholders. METHODS: A netnography completed with qualitative interviews with eight Italian and French nutrition and public health experts were carried out to highlight the dimensions (pragmatic, normative and cognitive) in which the Nutri-Score's legitimacy is being challenged among the stakeholders involved in FoPLs' implementation in Italy. The degree of influence and the position of these stakeholders on the debate around the Nutri-Score were assessed through the Stakeholder Theory (SHT), using their respective level of power, legitimacy and urgency. Furthermore, we compared the Italian and the French contexts on the issue. RESULTS: The direct implication of political parties and media outlets in framing the Italian debate around Nutri-Score as well as the high influence of corporate unions, led to a different political outcome than in France. Results also show that the deconstruction of the legitimacy of the Nutri-Score in Italy pertained mainly to its pragmatic dimension according to the Italian public health experts. Nevertheless, its two other dimensions (normative and cognitive) are also questioned by high-influence stakeholders. CONCLUSION: Due to the limited mobilization of scientific expertise over the issue, the debate in Italy stayed centered around the "attack" of the Nutri-Score to the Italian way of life, mixing up concepts such as Made in Italy products and the Mediterranean diet.

Are foods 'healthy' or 'healthier'? Front-of-pack labelling and the concept of healthiness applied to foods.

While food-based dietary guidelines have been widely disseminated for decades to improve nutritional knowledge in the population about healthy diets, more recent interventions such as front-of-pack labelling have made the differences between the two approaches apparent. While food-based dietary guidelines provide the overarching framework and benchmarks for a healthy diet, based on the current knowledge of the associations between various dietary components and health outcomes, front-of-pack labelling provides guidance to select a specific food, either within a food group or among similar foods belonging to various brands. Labelling foods as 'healthy' or 'unhealthy' raises multiple questions on the criteria used to define the terms and the implications of assigning an absolute healthiness value to an individual food in the context of complex diets. Gradual systems may provide more relative assessments and avoid dichotomisation. The present article presents the inherent differences and the complementarity of food-based dietary guidelines and food choice guidance in the context of food labelling.

Guideline Daily Amounts Versus Nutri-Score Labeling: Perceptions of Greek Consumers About Front-of-Pack Label.

Nutrition information is becoming more urgent than ever so that consumers can make informed choices when buying food. This study aimed to investigate consumers' perceptions and behavior of the front-of-pack label (FOPL), between two specific labeling systems, the Nutri-Score and the Guideline Daily Amounts (GDA). This is a post hoc analysis of data from a previous, more extensive cross-sectional study conducted from April 2021 to June 2021. A total of 510 participants were included in the study, of whom 49.6% were women. Participants' perceptions were assessed in nine questions on a five-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree). Multivariate variance analysis (MANOVA) was performed to test the effects of the label GDA vs. Nutri-Score on the overall positive and negative perceptions. We found that the Nutri-Score label was significantly more understandable (p=0.003), clear, visible, and preferable (p<0.001) than the GDA label, which required more time to be understood. The findings indicate that the interpretive label, Nutri-Score, was superior to the non-interpretive label GDA, in terms of consumers' perception, more visibility, less time-consuming, and reliability. The FOPL can improve the ability of consumers in Greece to understand the healthfulness of food products.

Impact of the Front-of-Pack Label Nutri-Score on the Nutritional Quality of Food Choices in a Quasi-Experimental Trial in Catering.

The front-of-pack labelling Nutri-Score has recently been implemented as a policy measure to improve the healthiness of food choices. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of the Nutri-Score label in catering. A quasi-experimental trial was conducted in France between 16 December 2019 and 13 March 2020 in two staff restaurants (one intervention and one control site) from the same company. After a control period of seven weeks, the Nutri-Score label was affixed on all proposed products in the intervention site. Overall effects of the intervention were investigated using a difference in difference approach with generalised linear models. Over the 13 weeks of the study, 2063 participants who frequented the restaurant cafeteria at least once were included (1268 and 795 in the intervention and control site, respectively), representing 36,114 meals. Overall, the intervention led to a significant improvement in the nutritional quality of meals (p = 0.008) and a significant reduction in the intake of calories, sugars and saturated fat (p < 0.0001). Mixed effects models showed a qualitative improvement of food choices initially, and an adaptation of the quantities consumed over time, suggesting for the first time longer-term effects of the label on dietary behaviour.

Nutri-Score: The Most Efficient Front-of-Pack Nutrition Label to Inform Portuguese Consumers on the Nutritional Quality of Foods and Help Them Identify Healthier Options in Purchasing Situations.

Several studies have identified Front-of-Pack Nutrition Labels (FoPLs) as a promising strategy to improve the nutritional quality of consumers' food choices and encourage manufacturers to offer healthier products. This study aims to fill the evidence gap regarding the most effective FoPL among the Portuguese population. In total, 1059 Portuguese participants were recruited through a web panel provider and asked to declare their intended food choices and to rank three sets of products (pizza, cakes and breakfast cereals) according to their nutritional quality, first in the absence of any labelling, and then with a FoPL displayed on-pack (five FoPLs tested). Finally, participants were asked to answer nine statements related to perceptions of FoPLs. Results showed that participants improved their food choices, depending on the FoPL and the food category. All FoPLs led to a higher percentage of correct responses on the ranking task compared to the no label condition. The Nutri-Score was among the FoPLs producing the greatest improvement across all food categories compared to the reference intakes (OR = 6.45 [4.43-9.39], p-value < 0.0001) and facilitating the highest percentage to correctly rank products according to nutritional quality. This study suggests that, among the available options, Nutri-Score is the most efficient FoPL to inform Portuguese consumers of the nutritional quality of foods and help them identify healthier options in mock purchasing situations.

Is FOP Nutrition Label Nutri-Score Well Understood by Consumers When Comparing the Nutritional Quality of Added Fats, and Does It Negatively Impact the Image of Olive Oil?

It has been suggested that the current ranking of olive oil by Nutri-Score (C) is not in line with its nutritional quality and could have a negative impact on the sales and consumption of olive oil, especially compared to other added fats with lower nutritional qualities One of the objectives of this study is to investigate consumers' understanding of Nutri-Score when comparing the nutritional quality of added fats, and to test whether or not Nutri-Score has a negative impact on the image and the choice of olive oil in a sample of Spanish consumers. A cross-sectional study of 486 Spanish adults (mean age ± SD: 45.8 ± 14.0 years; 48.6% women) was conducted. Subjects were recruited through a web panel provider to participate in an online questionnaire. Almost 80% of participants declared that Nutri-Score was useful for recognizing the differences in nutritional quality between the eight added fats presented in the study; 89.1% rightly identified that olive oil was among the added fats with the best nutritional quality (vs. 4.1% for rapeseed oil (Nutri-Score C), and less than 3% for other added fats (Nutri-Score D or E)). When asked about which added fat they would buy more frequently, 86.2% of participants selected olive oil. Then, after being reminded that among added fats, the Nutri-Score C given to olive oil was the best grade, a majority of participants declared that they would keep consuming olive oil as much as before (71.4%). Finally, almost 78% of participants thought that Nutri-Score should be displayed on olive oil. In conclusion, the results of our study suggest that displaying Nutri-Score on olive oil was well accepted and understood by a large majority of participants who appeared to accept the current ranking of the Nutri-Score for olive oil (Nutri-Score C).

[Nutri-Score: the results 3 years after its official adoption In France]. / Nutri-Score : le bilan 3 ans après son adoption officielle en France.

"Nutri-score : results 3 years after its official adoption in franc Since its adoption 3 years ago, we have witnessed a strong dynamic of Nutri-Score both in France and in several European countries. Scientific work demonstrating its effectiveness has accumulated. More and more manufacturers and retailers are committed to displaying the Nutri-Score on their products, which is the subject of strong consumer support. A battle against powerful lobbies is underway at the level of the European Commission for it to be chosen in 2022 as the harmonised and mandatory nutritional logo for Europe. But right now, healthcare professionals, especially medical doctors, can use this tool as part of the nutritional care of their patients to help them improve the nutritional quality of their food choices at the point of purchase."

"Nutri-score : le bilan 3 ans après son adoption officielle en France Depuis son adoption, il y a 3 ans, nous avons assisté à une réelle montée en puissance du Nutri-Score tant en France que dans plusieurs pays européens. Les travaux scientifiques démontrant son efficacité se sont accumulés. De plus en plus d'industriels et de distributeurs se sont engagés à afficher le Nutri-Score, qui fait l'objet d'une forte adhésion des consommateurs. Une bataille contre de puissants lobbys est en cours au niveau de la Commission européenne pour qu'il soit choisi en 2022 comme le logo nutritionnel harmonisé et obligatoire pour l'Europe. Mais dès à présent, les professionnels de santé, notamment les médecins, peuvent utiliser cet outil dans le cadre de la prise en charge nutritionnelle de leurs patients pour les aider à améliorer la qualité nutritionnelle de leurs achats."

The impact of the Nutri-Score front-of-pack nutrition label on purchasing intentions of unprocessed and processed foods: post-hoc analyses from three randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: The Nutri-Score summary graded front-of-pack nutrition label has been identified as an efficient tool to increase the nutritional quality of pre-packed food purchases. However, no study has been conducted to investigate the effect of the Nutri-Score on the shopping cart composition, considering the type of foods. The present paper aims to investigate the effect of the Nutri-Score on the type of food purchases, in terms of the relative contribution of unpacked and pre-packed foods, or the processing degree of foods. METHODS: Between September 2016 and April 2017, three consecutive randomized controlled trials were conducted in three specific populations - students (N = 1866), low-income individuals (N = 336) and subjects suffering from cardiometabolic diseases (N = 1180) - to investigate the effect of the Nutri-Score on purchasing intentions compared to the Reference Intakes and no label. Using these combined data, the proportion of unpacked products in the shopping carts, as well as the distribution of products across food categories taking into account the degree of processing (NOVA classification) were assessed by trials arm. RESULTS: The shopping carts of participants simulating purchases with the Nutri-Score affixed on pre-packed foods contained higher proportion of unpacked products - especially raw fruits and meats, i.e. with no FoPL -, compared to participants purchasing with no label (difference of 5.93 percentage points [3.88-7.99], p-value< 0.0001) or with the Reference Intakes (difference of 5.27[3.25-7.29], p-value< 0.0001). This higher proportion was partly explained by fewer purchases of pre-packed processed and ultra-processed products overall in the Nutri-Score group. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide new insights on the positive effect of the Nutri-Score, which appears to decrease purchases in processed products resulting in higher proportions of unprocessed and unpacked foods, in line with public health recommendations.

[Nutri-Score and ultra-processing: two different, complementary, non-contradictory dimensions]. / Nutri-Score y ultra-procesamiento: dos dimensiones diferentes, complementarias y no contradictorias.

INTRODUCTION: The front-of-pack nutritional labeling system Nutri-Score is sometimes under attack because it classifies as A and B certain ultra-processed foods. In fact, this is not surprising given that nutritional quality (assessed by Nutri-Score) and ultra-processing (assessed by the NOVA classification) do not cover the same "health dimensions" in foods but rather different dimensions likely to affect health through specific mechanisms. Although they cover different and complementary dimensions, there is nevertheless an overall association between the degree of processing and nutritional quality of foods. But within the group of ultra-processed foods there are differences in the number, type and doses of additives, as well as differences in nutritional quality. Therefore Nutri-Score allows, within the category of ultra-processed foods (as for all categories of the NOVA classification), to differentiate the nutritional quality of foods, which is essential in terms of health impact. Indeed, regardless of the level of food processing, it has been shown that consuming foods that are better ranked on the Nutri-Score scale is associated with a health benefit and a lower risk of chronic diseases. This is important because, even if it is recommended to reduce the consumption of ultra-processed foods, for those who do not want to or cannot avoid consuming them, for those for whom cooking is difficult (for reasons of time, ease, taste, etc.), the choice of foods better ranked on the Nutri-Score scale has a positive impact on health. Nutri-Score and ultra-transformation must be considered two different and complementary dimensions.

INTRODUCCIÓN: Al logotipo nutricional Nutri-Score se le ataca a veces porque clasifica como A y B algunos alimentos ultraprocesados. Esto no es sorprendente si se tiene en cuenta que la calidad nutricional (evaluada por Nutri-Score) y el ultraprocesamiento (evaluado por la clasificación NOVA) no abarcan las mismas "dimensiones de salud" de los alimentos, sino que cada una de ellas puede impactar en la salud por mecanismos específicos propios. Al mismo tiempo que cubren dimensiones diferentes y complementarias, sigue existiendo una asociación global entre el grado de transformación y la calidad nutricional de los alimentos. Dentro de los alimentos ultraprocesados existen diferencias en términos de número, tipo y dosis de aditivos, pero también en términos de calidad nutricional, por lo que Nutri-Score permite, dentro de la amplia categoría de productos ultraprocesados (como en todas las categorías de la clasificación NOVA), distinguir su calidad nutricional, lo que es primordial en términos de impacto sobre la salud. Cualquiera que sea el nivel de procesamiento de los alimentos, se ha demostrado que el consumo de alimentos mejor clasificados por Nutri-Score es beneficioso para la salud y tiene un menor riesgo de patologías crónicas. Esto es importante porque, incluso si se recomienda reducir el consumo de alimentos ultraprocesados, para aquellos que no quieren o no pueden evitar consumirlos o para quienes es complicado cocinar (por razones de tiempo, facilidad, preferencia, etc.) la elección de un alimento mejor clasificado en la escala Nutri-Score tiene un impacto favorable en el plano de la salud. En consecuencia, Nutri-Score y el ultraprocesamiento deben considerarse como dos dimensiones diferentes y complementarias.

Online Consumer Survey Comparing Different Front-of-Pack Labels in Greece.

According to the WHO, front-of-pack nutrition labeling provides simplified nutrition information in the form of symbols, colors or words that can help consumers understand the nutritional quality of food, thus leading them to healthier food choices. It is considered of the utmost importance to explore the knowledge and understanding of consumers about this form of nutrition labeling. The aim of this study was to investigate the understanding and perceptions of Greek consumers in response to five different front-of-pack nutrition labels (FoPLs): the Multiple Traffic Lights, Health Star Rating System, Guideline Daily Amounts, Warning Symbols and Nutri-Score. From April 2021 to June 2021, 1278 participants from Greece took part in an online survey where they were asked to rank three products according to their nutritional quality. The classification process was performed first without FoPLs and then with FoPLs. The ability to classify products according to their nutritional quality was evaluated with multinomial logistic regression models, and the Nutri-Score label presented greater improvements when compared to the GDA label for Greek consumers. The Nutri-Score seemed to better help the Greek consumers rank foods according to their nutritional value.

Effectiveness of Different Front-of-Pack Nutrition Labels among Italian Consumers: Results from an Online Randomized Controlled Trial.

In Italy, discussions are currently ongoing to implement a front-of-pack nutrition label (FoPL) while a growing number of European countries are adopting the Nutri-Score. The effectiveness of the Nutri-Score among Italian consumers requires further investigation. This study compared five FoPLs among Italian participants (Health Star Rating system, multiple traffic lights, Nutri-Score, reference intakes, warning symbol) in terms of food choices and understanding of the labels by consumers. In 2019, 1032 Italian consumers completed an online survey in which they were asked to select one product they would likely purchase from a set of three foods with different nutrient profiles and then classify the products within the set according to their nutritional quality, first with no label and then with one of the five FoPLs on the pack. While no significant difference across labels was observed for food choices, the Nutri-Score demonstrated the highest overall performance in helping consumers to correctly rank the products according to their nutritional quality compared to the reference intakes (OR = 2.18 (1.50-3.17), p-value < 0.0001). Our results provide new insights on the effectiveness of the Nutri-Score, which would be a relevant tool to inform Italian consumers on the nutritional quality of food products.

Performance of the Front-of-Pack Nutrition Label Nutri-Score to Discriminate the Nutritional Quality of Foods Products: A Comparative Study across 8 European Countries.

Abstract: In Europe, discussions are currently ongoing to harmonize front-of-pack nutritional labelling, while some countries have adopted or are considering implementing the Nutri-Score. However, its adaptability to multiple nutritional contexts in Europe requires further investigation. This study aimed to evaluate the applicability of the Nutri-Score in various European countries, regarding its ability to discriminate the nutritional quality of foods and its consistency with national dietary recommendations. The European Food Information Resource (EUROFIR) nutritional composition databases from eight European countries (Finland, France, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Sweden, and Switzerland) were used. The distribution of foods across the Nutri-Score classes within food groups was assessed, as well as the discriminating performance of the label, and the adequacy of nutritional recommendations. The Nutri-Score demonstrated high discriminating ability for all food groups, with similar trends in the eight countries, and consistency with nutritional recommendations. For instance, fruit and vegetable products were mainly classified in the two healthiest Nutri-Score categories, while sugar and animal fat products were mainly classified in the two less healthy categories of the Nutri-Score. Our results support the fact that the Nutri-Score would be a relevant tool to discriminate the nutritional quality of products within and across relevant food groups in different European countries, with consistency with nutritional recommendations.