MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2485291968 · doi:10.1111/obr.12445

Influence of unhealthy food and beverage marketing on children's dietary intake and preference: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized trials

2016· review· en· W2485291968 on OpenAlexafffund
Behnam Sadeghirad, Tara Duhaney, Shahrzad Motaghipisheh, Norm R.C. Campbell, Bradley C. Johnston

Bibliographic record

VenueObesity Reviews · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Work & HealthLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of CalgaryMcMaster UniversityUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationPublic Health OntarioHospital for Sick Children
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMcMaster University
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisRandomized controlled trialDietary SucroseCalorieEnvironmental healthRefined grainsConfidence intervalPreferencePsycINFOMEDLINEFood scienceObesityWhole grainsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Marketing of foods and beverages high in fat, sugar and salt are suggested to contribute to poor dietary behaviours in children and diet-related diseases later in life. This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials aimed to assess the effects of unhealthy food and beverage marketing on dietary intake (grams or kilocalories) and dietary preference (preference score or percentage of participants who selected specific foods/beverages) among children 2 to 18 years of age. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO up to January 2015 for terms related to advertising, unhealthy foods or beverages among children. Randomized trials that assessed the effects of unhealthy food and beverage marketing compared with non-dietary advertisement or no advertisement in children were considered eligible. Two authors independently extracted information on study characteristics and outcomes of interest and assessed risk of bias and the overall quality of evidence using grade methodology. Meta-analysis was conducted separately for dietary intake and preference using a random-effects model. We identified 29 eligible studies, of which 17 studies were included for meta-analysis of dietary preference and nine for meta-analysis of dietary intake. Almost half of the studies were at high risk of bias. Our meta-analysis showed that in children exposed to unhealthy dietary marketing, dietary intake significantly increased (mean difference [MD] = 30.4 kcal, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.9 to 57.9, and MD = 4.8 g, 95%CI 0.8 to 8.8) during or shortly after exposure to advertisements. Similarly, children exposed to the unhealthy dietary marketing had a higher risk of selecting the advertised foods or beverages (relative risk = 1.1, 95%CI 1.0 to 1.2; P = 0.052). The evidence indicates that unhealthy food and beverage marketing increases dietary intake (moderate quality evidence) and preference (moderate to low quality evidence) for energy-dense, low-nutrition food and beverage. Unhealthy food and beverage marketing increased dietary intake and influenced dietary preference in children during or shortly after exposure to advertisements. © 2016 World Obesity.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.064
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.064
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0210.043
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.116
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations449
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObesity ReviewsSame topicObesity, Physical Activity, DietFrench-language works237,207