Table 4.
Change in preference or consumption of a product when a health-related claim was present
| First author (year) | Outcome measure | Product category | Claim sub-type (nutrient/target - health relationship) | Results | Does it support the hypothesis? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ares (2008) [25] | Rating: willingness to try, 7-point Likert scale | Yogurt | NOF (antioxidants) | −3.77% (−5.91%, −1.63%) | Y + N |
| Ncon (fibre) | -3.34% (−5.48%, −1.20%) | ||||
| Ncon (fat) | -6.80% (−8.94%), (−4.66%) | ||||
| Milk desserts | NOF (antioxidants) | -2.98% (−5.20%, −0.75%) | |||
| Ncon (fibre) | -2.77% (−5.00%, −0.55%) | ||||
| Ncon (fat) | -1.81% (−4.04%, 0.41%) | ||||
| Bread | NOF (antioxidants) | -4.03% (−6.32%, −1.74%) | |||
| Ncon (fibre) | -0.70% (−2.99%, 1.59%) | ||||
| Ncon (fat) | -4.21% (−6.50%, −1.92%) | ||||
| Mayonnaise | NOF (antioxidants) | -12.12% (−14.63, −9.60) | |||
| Ncon (fibre) | -19.86% (−22.37, −17.34) | ||||
| Ncon (fat) | −1.01% (−3.52%, 1.51%) | ||||
| Ares (2009) [26] | Rating: willingness to try, 7-point Likert scale | Milk dessert | NOF (fibre - calcium absorption + beneficial gut bacteria),(antioxidant - fat oxidation + cellular health) | +29.37% | HC: Y NC: N |
| RDR: (fibre - cancer), (antioxidants - heart disease + cancer) | +31.47% | ||||
| Ncon (fibre, b-glucans) | +16.29% | ||||
| Ncon (antioxidant, flavoids) | +14.06% | ||||
| Belei (2012) [31] | Mean amount consumed | Chocolate | Ncon (fat) | +38.4% (25.0%, 51.7%) | Y + N |
| NOF (cacao - antioxidant) | -34.3% (−41.3%, −27.3%) | ||||
| Replication study: | |||||
| Ncon (fat) | + 43.4% (18.5%, 68.2%) | ||||
| NOF (cacao - antioxidant) | -47.2% (−54.4%, −39.9%) | ||||
| Ncon (low cholesterol | −49.5% (−54.6%, −44.4%) | ||||
| Carbonneau (2015) [32] | 10 day mean energy (kcal) intake | . | Ncon (fat) | +3.4% (−2.1%, 8.9%) | Y |
| Ncon (energy) | + 3.9% (−1.9, 9.8%) | ||||
| Coleman (2014) [34] | Rating: purchase intent, 5-point Likert scale | White bread. | HRIC or GHC/Prebiotic | +17.6% (11.2%, 24.0%) | Y |
| NOF (satiety) | + 1.2% (−5.7%, 8.1%) | ||||
| NOF (weight) | + 14.9% (6.4%, 23.4%) | ||||
| RDR (cancer) | + 13.3% (5.3%, 21.4%) | ||||
| NOF (minerals) | + 22.0% (15.1%, 28.9%) | ||||
| Kiesel (2013) [39] | Sales over 4 weeks for pre-exposure and exposure period. | Microwave popcorn. | NUTRIENT CLAIMS | +16.1% (12.0%, 20.2%) | Y |
| Ncon (energy) | + 25.4% | ||||
| Ncon (fat) | 14.6% + 3.2% | ||||
| Ncon (fat –FDA) | |||||
| Koenigstorfer (2013) [40] | Mean amount consumed | Savoury snack (trail mix) | GHC (Fitness) | +149% (110.9%, 186.2%) | Y |
| N serving themselves: | OR 4.4 (3.6, 5.1) | ||||
| Kozup (2003) [41] | Rating: purchase intent, 7-point Likert scale | Frozen ready meal (lasagne) | RDR (saturated fat + cholesterol - CHD), Logo (Heart healthy - novel logo with description provided) | 15% | Y |
| Lin (2015) [43] | Purchase intent rating | Tea drink | NOF (weight loss) | +10.22% (−20.9%, 41.4%) | Y |
| Roberto (2012) [52] | Rating: purchase intent, 9-point Likert scale | Breakfast cereal | Logo: Servings per pack | +16.3% (−2.7%, 35.4%) | Y + N |
| Logo: Serving size | + 23.7% (3.8%, 43.6%) | ||||
| Buying for children | |||||
| Logo: Servings per pack | +20.4% (0.8%, 40.1%) | ||||
| Logo: Serving size | + 16.6% (−2.3%, 35.4%) | ||||
| Logo: Servings per pack | -0.3% (−13.9%, 13.3%) | ||||
| Meant amount consumed: Total cereal + milk eaten (grams) Cereal poured (grams) | Logo: Serving size | + 5.8% (−9.4%, 21.0%) | |||
| Steenhuis (2010) [53] | Mean amount consumed | Chocolate mousse cake | Logo (Choices) | −7.4% (−21.7%, 6.9%) | N |
| Wansink (2006) [14] | Study 1: mean calories served | Chocolate and granola. | Ncon (fat) | Study 1: +28.4% | Y |
| Study 3: mean calories consumed | Study 3: +50.1% |