Rebecca L Franckle1, Douglas E Levy2, Lorena Macias-Navarro3, Eric B Rimm1, Anne N Thorndike4. 1. 1Department of Nutrition,Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health,665 Huntington Avenue,SPH-2,Room 309,Boston,MA 02115,USA. 2. 2Mongan Institute Health Policy Center,Massachusetts General Hospital,Boston,MA,USA. 3. 4General Medicine Division,Massachusetts General Hospital,Boston,MA,USA. 4. 3Harvard Medical School,Boston,MA,USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study was to test the effectiveness of financial incentives and traffic-light labels to reduce purchases of sugar-sweetened beverages in a community supermarket. DESIGN: In this randomized controlled trial, after a 2-month baseline period (February-March 2014), in-store traffic-light labels were posted to indicate healthy (green), less healthy (yellow) or unhealthy (red) beverages. During the subsequent five months (April-August 2014), participants in the intervention arm were eligible to earn a $US 25 in-store gift card each month they refrained from purchasing red-labelled beverages. SETTING: Urban supermarket in Chelsea, MA, USA, a low-income Latino community. SUBJECTS:Participants were customers of this supermarket who had at least one child living at home. A total of 148 customers (n 77 in the intervention group and n 71 in the control group) were included in the final analyses. RESULTS: Outcomes were monthly in-store purchases tracked using a store loyalty card and self-reported consumption of red-labelled beverages. Compared with control participants, the proportion of intervention participants who purchased any red-labelled beverages decreased by 9 % more per month (P=0·002). More intervention than control participants reduced their consumption of red-labelled beverages (-23 % v. -2 % for consuming ≥1 red beverage/week, P=0·01). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, financial incentives paired with in-store traffic-light labels modestly reduced purchase and consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages by customers of a community supermarket.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study was to test the effectiveness of financial incentives and traffic-light labels to reduce purchases of sugar-sweetened beverages in a community supermarket. DESIGN: In this randomized controlled trial, after a 2-month baseline period (February-March 2014), in-store traffic-light labels were posted to indicate healthy (green), less healthy (yellow) or unhealthy (red) beverages. During the subsequent five months (April-August 2014), participants in the intervention arm were eligible to earn a $US 25 in-store gift card each month they refrained from purchasing red-labelled beverages. SETTING: Urban supermarket in Chelsea, MA, USA, a low-income Latino community. SUBJECTS:Participants were customers of this supermarket who had at least one child living at home. A total of 148 customers (n 77 in the intervention group and n 71 in the control group) were included in the final analyses. RESULTS: Outcomes were monthly in-store purchases tracked using a store loyalty card and self-reported consumption of red-labelled beverages. Compared with control participants, the proportion of intervention participants who purchased any red-labelled beverages decreased by 9 % more per month (P=0·002). More intervention than control participants reduced their consumption of red-labelled beverages (-23 % v. -2 % for consuming ≥1 red beverage/week, P=0·01). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, financial incentives paired with in-store traffic-light labels modestly reduced purchase and consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages by customers of a community supermarket.
Authors: Elizabeth J Mayer-Davis; Jean M Lawrence; Dana Dabelea; Jasmin Divers; Scott Isom; Lawrence Dolan; Giuseppina Imperatore; Barbara Linder; Santica Marcovina; David J Pettitt; Catherine Pihoker; Sharon Saydah; Lynne Wagenknecht Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-04-13 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Anne N Thorndike; Oliver-John M Bright; Melissa A Dimond; Ronald Fishman; Douglas E Levy Journal: Public Health Nutr Date: 2016-11-28 Impact factor: 4.022
Authors: Lisa Harnack; J Michael Oakes; Brian Elbel; Timothy Beatty; Sarah Rydell; Simone French Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2016-11-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Ashkan Afshin; José L Peñalvo; Liana Del Gobbo; Jose Silva; Melody Michaelson; Martin O'Flaherty; Simon Capewell; Donna Spiegelman; Goodarz Danaei; Dariush Mozaffarian Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-03-01 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Peter von Philipsborn; Jan M Stratil; Jacob Burns; Laura K Busert; Lisa M Pfadenhauer; Stephanie Polus; Christina Holzapfel; Hans Hauner; Eva A Rehfuess Journal: Obes Facts Date: 2020-08-12 Impact factor: 3.942
Authors: Jenny Jia; Douglas E Levy; Jessica L McCurley; Emma Anderson; Emily D Gelsomin; Bianca Porneala; Anne N Thorndike Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2022-03-10 Impact factor: 6.604
Authors: Peter von Philipsborn; Jan M Stratil; Jacob Burns; Laura K Busert; Lisa M Pfadenhauer; Stephanie Polus; Christina Holzapfel; Hans Hauner; Eva Rehfuess Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-06-12
Authors: Rachel A Crockett; Sarah E King; Theresa M Marteau; A T Prevost; Giacomo Bignardi; Nia W Roberts; Brendon Stubbs; Gareth J Hollands; Susan A Jebb Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-02-27
Authors: Victoria L Jenneson; Francesca Pontin; Darren C Greenwood; Graham P Clarke; Michelle A Morris Journal: Nutr Rev Date: 2022-05-09 Impact factor: 6.846