Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT05610930

Is a Front-of-package Label Contaning Information on Both Nutrient Profile and Ultra-processing Well Understood?

A modified version of the Nutri-Score (Nutri-Score 2.0), containing an additional graphic mention when the product is ultra-processed, has been proposed. The investigators aim to study, in a randomised controlled trial design nested in the NutriNet-Santé cohort, the impact of this modified version on the objective understanding of foods' nutritional quality, and on the identification of UPFs as primary outcomes. They also aim to study as secondary outcomes the impact of this label on purchasing intentions and the product perceived as the healthiest.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Objective Understanding of Nutritional Label

Age range

18 year–99 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Equipe de recherche en Epidémiologie nutritionnelle

Bobigny, 93017, France

About this study

Two arms will be enrolled. The control arm will not have access to any FOP Label (the current situation in Europe), and the experimental arm will have access to Nutri-Score 2.0. Participants of both arms wil be asked to rank food products of 3 categories (breakfast cereals, cookies, ready-to-eat meals) according to their nutrient profile, and to identify ultra-processed foods.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

Enrolled in the NutriNet-Santé cohort

Exclusion criteria

None

Treatment and study plan

Front-of-pack label NutriScore 2.0

Other

Participants in the experimental arm can see, in case the product is ultra-processed, a black banner surrounding the Nutri-Score, with the word "ultra-transformé", meaning ultra-processed, and no black banner otherwise. Participants in the control arm had no label at all. The intervention (the Nutri-Score 2.0) was added on the packaging on the products included in the 3 sets of images that participants recieved via the questionnaire.

Primary outcomes

  1. Objective understanding the nutritional quality.

    Time frame: Between 30 minutes and 1 hour (the time needed to fill the questionnaire)

    The answers of the participants on the corresponding questionnaire (via the NutriNet-Santé website) were expected to match the order according to which Nutri-Score ranks the 3 products (highest nutritional quality, second highest, third highest). In case of ex-æquos (i.e., two products having the same Nutri-Score), both were considered correct. Therefore, the number of correct answers for the nutritional dimension could range between 0 (no correct answers) to 9 (3 best products*3 food categories, all correct answers).

  2. Objective understanding the ultra-processing dimension.

    Time frame: Between 30 minutes and 1 hour (the time needed to fill the questionnaire)

    Participants were expected to identify all UPFs on the corresponding questionnaire (via the NutriNet-Santé website). For each product, the answer was considered correct if an UPF was identified as such by the participant (the gold standard being the presence of the black banner of the Nutri-Score 2.0, corresponding to the NOVA 4 "ultra-processed" definition), and a non-UPF was identified as such. Therefore, the number of correct answers for the food processing dimension could range between 0 (no correct answers) and 22 (correct answer for all 22 products).

Secondary outcomes

  1. Purchasing intentions

    Time frame: Between 30 minutes and 1 hour (the time needed to fill the questionnaire)

    Assessed with the question (in the corresponding questionnaire via the NutriNet-Santé website) : "Which of these products would you purchase more frequently?". This aimed to explore whether Nutri-Score 2.0 (the intervention) had an effect on the purchasing intentions.

  2. Product perceived as the healthiest

    Time frame: Between 30 minutes and 1 hour (the time needed to fill the questionnaire)

    Assessed with the question (in the corresponding questionnaire via the NutriNet-Santé website) : "Which product seems the healthiest to you?". This aimed to explore whether Nutri-Score 2.0 (the intervention) had an effect on the product that the participants considered as the healthiest.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

University of Paris 13

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Effect of a New Graphically Modified Nutri-Score on the Objective Understanding of Foods' Nutritional Quality and Ultra-processing - a Randomised Controlled Trial

Important dates

Study start
2022
Primary completion
2022
Study completion
2022
First posted
Nov 9, 2022
Registry last updated
May 12, 2023

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.