TABLE 3.
The different types of measures studied in the systematic reviews and their impact on sugar-sweetened beverages demand, sugar-sweetened beverages consumption, weight outcomes, and other outcomes. (Impact of measures aiming to reduce sugars intake in the general population and their implementation in Europe: a scoping review. Switzerland. 2019–2021).
| SSB a demand | SSB a consumption | Weight outcomes | Other outcomes | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Economic tools | ||||
| [16] | + (sugar-added foods intake) | |||
| [6] | + | |||
| [15] | + | |||
| [17] | + | |||
| [30] | + | + | ||
| *[31] | + | |||
| *[32] | +/Ø | |||
| *[33] | + | + | ||
| *[34] | + | − | ||
| *[35] | + | |||
| *[36] | + | + | +/Ø | |
| Label/reformulation | ||||
| [6] | + labelling | |||
| +/- reformulation | ||||
| [20] | +/− (healthier diet quality) | |||
| [18] | + | + (sugar intake) | ||
| [21] | +/Ø | |||
| [19] | + (energy intake) | |||
| Environment only | ||||
| [6] | + | + | ||
| [27] | + | + (unhealthy snack intake) | ||
| *[38] | + | +/Ø | ||
| *[37] | + | |||
| *[40] | Ø | +/Ø | ||
| *[39] | + | +/Ø | ||
| *[34] | +/Ø | |||
| *[41] | + | + | ||
| Education only | ||||
| *[38] | + | +/Ø | ||
| *[37] | + | |||
| *[40] | Ø | +/Ø | ||
| *[39] | + | +/Ø | ||
| *[34] | +/Ø | |||
| Education/Environment | ||||
| [22] | +/Ø | |||
| [24] | +/− | |||
| [23] | + | Ø | ||
| [25] | + children and adolescents | |||
| Ø adults | ||||
| [26] | +/− | |||
| *[42] | +/Ø | |||
Sugar-sweetened beverages.
Authors with an asterisk are the SRs included in the review of SRs of Kirkpatrick et al. [12].
+ Beneficial effects; reduction in SSB consumption or weight outcomes observed in the large majority of studies.
Ø No effect: no reduction in SSB consumption or weight outcomes observed.
− Negative effect: increase in SSB consumption or weight outcomes observed.
+/Ø or +/−: both beneficial and no effect/negative effect observed.