Efficacy of front-of-pack warning label system versus guideline for daily amount on healthfulness perception, purchase intention and objective understanding of nutrient content of food products in Guatemala: a cross-over cluster randomized controlled experiment.

BACKGROUND: Front-of-package warning labels (FOPWL) have been adopted in many countries aiming at reducing the consumption of unhealthy food and drink products and have also been considered in Guatemala. The aim of the study is to evaluate the efficacy of FOPWL versus Guidelines for Daily Amount (GDA) on products' healthfulness perception (HP), purchase intention (PI) and the objective understanding of the nutrient content (UNC) in Guatemala. METHODS: Participants (children and adults) (n = 356) were randomly assigned to evaluate either FOPWL or GDA during a crossover cluster randomized experiment in rural and urban areas across 3 phases of exposure. During phase 1, participants evaluated mock-up images of single products (single task) and compared pairs of products within the same food category (comparison task) without any label. In phase 2, participants evaluated labels only (without any product), and during phase 3, they evaluated the same products and questions from phase 1, now depicting the assigned front-of-package label. We generated indicators for single-task questions and scores for comparison tasks, one for each HP, PI and UNC questions. We used intention-to-treat, difference-in-difference regression analysis to test whether exposure to FOPWL was associated with HP, PI and UNC, compared to GDA. We also tested models for children and adults and by area (rural/urban) separately adjusting for sociodemographic variables. RESULTS: In single tasks, FOPWL significantly decreased the PI (ß -18.1, 95%CI -23.3, -12.8; p < 0.001) and the HP (ß -13.2, 95%CI -18.4, -7.9; p < 0.001) of unhealthy food products compared to GDA. In the comparison task, FOPWL significantly increased the UNC (ß 20.4, 95%CI 17.0, 23.9; p < 0.001), improved PI towards healthier choices (OR 4.5, 95%CI 2.9, 7.0 p < 0.001) and HP (OR 5.6, 95%CI 2.8, 11.1; p < 0.001) compared to GDA. Similar results were found in children and adults and in urban and rural settings. CONCLUSIONS: FOPWL reduces products' healthfulness perception and purchase intention, and increases understanding of products' nutrient content compared to GDA.

Unhealthy food advertising on Costa Rican and Guatemalan television: a comparative study.

This study aimed to exhaustively explore the characteristics of food advertising on TV in Guatemala and Costa Rica. The International Network for Food and Obesity Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs) Research, Monitoring and Action Support (INFORMAS) methodology was applied. In 2016, we recorded 1440 h of video among 10 TV channels. We used the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) Nutrient Profile (NP) Model to identify 'critical nutrients', whose excessive consumption is associated with NCDs. We created a nutritional quality score (0 if the product did not exceed any critical nutrient, 1 if the product exceeded one and 2 if it exceeded ≥2). We classified food ads as permitted (score = 0) and not-permitted (score 1 or 2) for marketing. Persuasive marketing techniques were classified as promotional characters (e.g. Batman), premium offers (e.g. toys), brand benefit claims (e.g. tasty) and health-related claims (e.g. nutritious). In Guatemala, foods that exceeded one critical nutrient were more likely to use persuasive marketing techniques, and in Costa Rica were those with an excess of ≥2 critical nutrients, compared with foods without any excess in critical nutrients [Guatemala: promotional characters (odds ratio, OR = 16.6, 95% confidence interval, CI: 5.8, 47.3), premium offers (OR = 3.4, 95% CI: 1.4, 8.2) and health-related claims (OR = 3.5, 95% CI: 2.2, 5.7); Costa Rica: health-related claims (OR = 4.2, 95% CI: 2.0, 8.5)]. In conclusion, Guatemalan and Costa Rican children are exposed to an overabundance of not-permitted food ads on TV. This justifies implementing national policies to reduce exposure to not-permitted food for marketing, including on TV and other media.

This study aimed to exhaustively explore the characteristics of food advertising on TV in Guatemala and Costa Rica. In 2016, we recorded 1440 h of video among 10 TV channels. We used the PAHO Nutrient Profile Model to identify 'critical nutrients' (e.g. sodium) whose excessive consumption is associated with Non-Communicable Chronic Diseases (e.g. hypertension). We created a nutritional quality score (0 if the product did not exceed any critical nutrient, 1 if the product exceeded one and 2 if it exceeded ≥2). We classified food ads as permitted (score = 0) and not-permitted (score 1 or 2) for marketing. Persuasive marketing techniques were classified as promotional characters, premium offers, brand benefit claims and health-related claims. In Guatemala, foods that exceeded one critical nutrient had a high probability of using promotional characters, premium offers and health-related claims than foods without any excess in critical nutrients. However, in Costa Rica health-related claims had a high probability of appearing with foods that exceeded ≥2 critical nutrients. In conclusion, Guatemalan and Costa Rican children are exposed to an overabundance of not-permitted food ads on TV. This justifies implementing national policies to reduce exposure to not-permitted food for marketing.

Benchmarking public policies to create healthy food environments compared to best practice: the Healthy Food Environment Policy Index in Guatemala.

BACKGROUND: Benchmarking the implementation of healthy food environment public policies against international best practices may accelerate the government response to prevent obesity and non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in the countries. The aim of the study was to determine the extent of food environment policy implementation in Guatemala and to identify and prioritize actions for the government to accelerate their implementation. METHODS: The INFORMAS Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI from the International Network for Food and Obesity/NCDs Research, Monitoring and Action Support) was used. Evidence of implementation for 50 good practice indicators within the seven food policies and six infrastructure support domains was compiled, and subsequently validated by Guatemalan government officials. A national civil society expert panel on public health and nutrition performed an online assessment of the implementation of healthy food environment policies against best international practices. The level of agreement among evaluators was measured using the Gwet second order agreement coefficient (AC2). The expert panel recommended actions for each indicator during on-site workshops and those actions were prioritized by importance and achievability. RESULTS: The expert panel rated implementation at zero for 26% of the indicators, very low for 28% of indicators, low for 42%, and medium for 4% of indicators (none were rated high). Indicators at medium implementation were related to the use of evidence for developing policies and ingredient list/nutrition information panels on packaged foods. Seventy-seven actions were recommended prioritizing the top 10 for immediate action. The Gwet AC2 was 0.73 (95% CI 0.67-0.80), indicating a good concordance among experts. CONCLUSIONS: In the Food-EPI of Guatemala, almost all indicators of good practice had a low or less level of implementation. The expert panel proposed 12 priority actions to accelerate policy implementation to tackle obesity and NCDs in the country.

An 11-country study to benchmark the implementation of recommended nutrition policies by national governments using the Healthy Food Environment Policy Index, 2015-2018.

The Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI) aims to assess the extent of implementation of recommended food environment policies by governments compared with international best practices and prioritize actions to fill implementation gaps. The Food-EPI was applied in 11 countries across six regions (2015-2018). National public health nutrition panels (n = 11-101 experts) rated the extent of implementation of 47 policy and infrastructure support good practice indicators by their government(s) against best practices, using an evidence document verified by government officials. Experts identified and prioritized actions to address implementation gaps. The proportion of indicators at "very low if any," "low," "medium," and "high" implementation, overall Food-EPI scores, and priority action areas were compared across countries. Inter-rater reliability was good (GwetAC2 = 0.6-0.8). Chile had the highest proportion of policies (13%) rated at "high" implementation, while Guatemala had the highest proportion of policies (83%) rated at "very low if any" implementation. The overall Food-EPI score was "medium" for Australia, England, Chile, and Singapore, while "very low if any" for Guatemala. Policy areas most frequently prioritized included taxes on unhealthy foods, restricting unhealthy food promotion and front-of-pack labelling. The Food-EPI was found to be a robust tool and process to benchmark governments' progress to create healthy food environments.