Table 4.
Labelling studies (including labelling and composition)* included in the current systematic review of food environments relevant to obesity and related chronic diseases in Latin America
| Labelling aspect | Labelling aspect | Country | Sampling | Compliance with legislation?†,‡ | Main findings | First author, year, reference | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Retail outlets | No. of products | Sample design | ||||||
| Presence of food labels and food label reliability | Presence of packaged food labels and claims | Costa Rica | 1 (supermarket) | 2910 | Inventory | N | 58 % of products had nutrition information. More than 100 different nutrition and health claims identified | Blanco-Metzler, 2011(48) |
| Overall | Chile | 1 (supermarket) | 1020 | Random sample | Y | 9·6 % of nutrition labelling had some type of error, the groups with most errors were packaged vegetables | Urquiaga, 2014(46) | |
| Brazil | NS | 153 | Convenience | N | Low reliability of food labels (label v. measured composition), e.g. under-report of saturated fat. Could be due to composition methods used | Lobanco, 2009(44) | ||
| Colombia, Brazil, Chile & Argentina | Food shops (n NS) | 40 per country | Convenience | Y | Labels in countries with mandatory labelling more likely to comply with CODEX. Brazil most comprehensive labels and more frequent, Colombia least. Health claims most common in Brazil and Argentina | Mayhew, 2015(51) | ||
| Sodium | Costa Rica | Supermarkets and bakeries | 183 | Sample | Y | High compliance of bread labels with regulation regarding Na content. Lower compliance for snacks; 43 % labels report less Na than measured | Montero-Campos, 2015(47) | |
| Brazil | NS | 17 | Convenience | Y | In 8 of 17 samples Na content higher compared with label. Most labels did not comply with legislation | Ribeiro, 2013(45) | ||
| Trans fat | Brazil | 1 (supermarket) | 2327 | Inventory | N | 50 % of products may have trans fats according to ingredients, only a small proportion of products declared trans fats on label | Silveira, 2013(43) | |
| Brazil | Supermarkets (n NS) | 150 | Convenience | Y | 55 % of food labels did not comply with trans fat labelling legislation | Dias, 2009(49) | ||
| Presence of restaurant food labels | Brazil | N/A | 114 (restaurants) | Stratified random sample | N | 25 % of restaurants provided nutritional information. More common in fast-food chains than full-service restaurants | Maestro, 2008(50) | |
| Nutrient/health food claims and other categories | Claims & composition | Brazil | 1 (supermarket) | 3449 | Inventory | N | Food products with nutrition claims have higher median Na contents than the corresponding conventional products | Nishida, 2016(54) |
| Brazil | 1 (supermarket) | 535 | Inventory | N | Foods with nutrient claims less healthy than those without according to NOVA and similar according to Ofcom | Rodrigues, 2017(52) | ||
| Claims & marketing to children | Brazil | 1 (supermarket) | 5620 | Inventory | Y | 9·5 % of products targeted children (n 535), products with nutrient claims were less healthy than or similar to those without | Rodrigues, 2016(53) | |
| Brazil | 1 (supermarket) | 535 | Inventory | Y | 88 % of foods targeting children were ultra-processed, 47 % had nutrient claim mostly about higher quantity of vitamins and minerals | Zucchi, 2016(55) | ||
| Nutrient adequacy | Sodium & serving size | Brazil | 1 (supermarket) | 2945 | Inventory | Y | 14 % of foods did not comply with serving sizes, 37 % had Na ≥ 5 mg/g (considered high) | Kraemer, 2016(56) |
| Sodium | Brazil | 1 (supermarket) | 1416 | Inventory | N | 58·8 % classified as high Na content, highest content in sauces, seasonings, broths, soups and prepared dishes | Martins, 2015(59) | |
| Sodium, fat, fibre | Brazil | 1 (supermarket) | 100 | Convenience | N | Labelling using traffic light criteria, 2/3 of products would be red for fibre and Na and 1/4 for fat | Longo-Silva, 2010(58) | |
| Saturated fat | Brazil | NS | 9 | Convenience | N | Large concentration of saturated fats found in products and n-6:n-3 above recommended levels | Gagliardi, 2009(57) | |
| Serving size | Serving size | Brazil | 1 (supermarket) | 2072 | Inventory | Y | Differences identified between Food Guide for the Brazilian Population and labelling law with respect to recommended serving sizes | Kliemann, 2014(63) |
| Brazil | 1 (supermarket) | 1953 | Convenience | Y | Declared serving size in most products complied with regulation. Only 4·1 % of foods had larger than recommended serving sizes | Kliemann, 2016(62) | ||
| Brazil | 1 (supermarket) | 1071 | Convenience | N | In 88 % of food groups the average serving size consumed by the Brazilian population was larger than the declared serving size | Kraemer, 2015(60) | ||
| Brazil | 1 (supermarket) | 451 | Inventory | Y | 76 % of dairy products met the law’s requirements for serving size but varied widely within categories | Machado, 2016(61) | ||
NS, not stated; N/A, not applicable; N, no; Y, yes.
All studies included were descriptive.
Study evaluates compliance of food labels with law or regulation on food labels.
Brazilian labelling regulation: the following nutrients must be declared in packaged products per portion; energy, carbohydrates, protein, total fat, saturated fat, trans fat and sodium. Additionally, if a nutrition claim is present in the label, nutrition information must report the quantity of the nutrient the nutrition claim refers to(64). Centro American (Nicaragua, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras and Costa Rica) nutrition labelling regulation: the following nutrients must be declared in food products per portion or 100 g or 100 ml; total energy, total fat, saturated fat, carbohydrates, sodium and protein. If a nutrition claim is present, the nutrient in question must be included. Nutrition claims definitions for different nutrients included in regulation(65,66). Former Chilean labelling law required nutrition facts table(129).