Correlates of nutrition label use among college students and young adults: a review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Nutrition labels are an essential source for consumers to obtain nutrition-related information on food products and serve as a population-level intervention with unparalleled reach. The present study systematically reviewed existing evidence on the correlates of nutrition label use among college students and young adults. DESIGN: Keyword and reference searches were conducted in PubMed, EBSCO, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. Inclusion criteria included: study design (randomized controlled trial, cohort study, pre-post study or cross-sectional study); population (college students and young adults 18-30 years old); main outcome (nutrition label use); article type (peer-reviewed publication); and language (English). SETTING: College/university. SUBJECTS: College students and young adults. RESULTS: Sixteen studies based on data from college surveys in four countries (USA, UK, Canada, South Korea) were identified from keyword and reference search. Reported prevalence of nutrition label use varied substantially across studies; a weighted average calculation showed 36·5 % of college students and young adults reported using labels always or often. Females were more likely to use nutrition labels than males. Nutrition label use was found to be associated with attitudes towards healthy diet, beliefs on the importance of nutrition labels in guiding food selection, self-efficacy, and nutrition knowledge and education. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of nutrition labelling on food purchase and intake could differ by population subgroups. Nutrition awareness campaigns and education programmes may be important mechanisms for promoting nutrition label use among college students and young adults. Future research is warranted to assess the role of label use on improved dietary decisions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".