Changes in consumer purchasing patterns at New York City chain restaurants following adoption of the sodium warning icon rule, 2015-2017
Prasad, D.; Jasek, J. P.; Anekwe, A. V.; Dominianni, C.; Mezzacca, T. A.; Sisti, J. S.; Farley, S. M.; Kessler, K.
Show abstract
In 2016, New York City (NYC) began enforcing a sodium warning regulation at chain restaurants, requiring placement of an icon next to any menu item containing [≥]2,300 mg sodium. As shifts in consumer purchases are a potential outcome of menu labeling, we investigated whether high-sodium purchases from NYC chains changed following policy implementation. Consumer purchases, using receipts for verification, were assessed at 2 full-service (FSR) and 2 quick-service (QSR) chain restaurants in NYC and Yonkers, NY, which did not have sodium menu labeling, in 2015 (baseline) and 2017 (follow-up). Difference-in-difference regression models, adjusted for demographic and location co-variates, tested whether the proportion of NYC respondents purchasing high-sodium item(s) (containing [≥]2,300 mg sodium) or whether mean sodium content of purchases changed, in FSR or QSR. Relative to Yonkers, the proportion of NYC respondents purchasing 1 or more high-sodium items did not significantly differ from baseline to follow-up at FSR (difference-in-difference: -4.6%, p=0.364) or QSR (difference-in-difference: -8.9%, p=0.196). Among NYC FSR respondents, mean sodium purchased significantly declined compared to Yonkers (difference-in-difference: -524 mg, p=0.012); no changes in mean sodium were observed among QSR participants (difference-in-difference: 258 mg, p=0.185). While the reduction in mean sodium purchased among NYC FSR patrons after the sodium warning implementation is encouraging, there was not a corresponding reduction in the proportion of respondents purchasing high-sodium items. Further research that evaluates longer-term changes in the restaurant environment, including menu offerings and consumer purchases, following such policies is warranted.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Sodium content of menu items in New York City chain restaurants following enforcement of the sodium warning icon rule, 2015-2017 99%
- Monitoring sodium content in packaged foods sold in the Americas and compliance with the Updated Regional Sodium Reduction Targets 95%
- Variability in Sodium Content of Takeaway Foods: Implications for Public Health and Nutrition Policy. 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Assessing the impact of a mandatory calorie labelling policy in out-of-home food outlets in England on consumer behaviour: a natural experimental study 92%
- Estimating the lagged effect of price discounting: a time-series study using transaction data of sugar sweetened beverages 92%
- A mixed methods study evaluating food insecurity and diet quality in households accessing food aid in England 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Impostor Phenomenon in the Nutrition and Dietetics Profession: An Online Cross-Sectional Survey 92%
- Factors affecting zero-waste behaviors: Focusing on the health effects of microplastics 89%
- COVID-19 Pandemic among Latinx Farmworker and Non-farmworker Families in North Carolina: Knowledge, Risk Perceptions, and Preventive Behaviors 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Advertising ultra-processed foods around urban and rural schools in Kenya 91%
- A Mixed-Methods Comparison of Gender Differences in Alcohol Consumption and Drinking Characteristics among Patients in Moshi, Tanzania 89%
- Native American Resilience to Protect Family Nutrition During a Pandemic: A Qualitative Analysis 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Patterns of SARS-CoV-2 testing preferences in a national cohort in the United States 90%
- Association of Opioid Use Disorder With 2016 Presidential Voting Patterns: A Cross-Sectional Study in New York State at Census Tract Level 88%
- Testing, Testing: What SARS-CoV-2 testing services do adults in the United States actually want? 86%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.