A voluntary nutrition labeling program in restaurants: Consumer awareness, use of nutrition information, and food selection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Health Check (HC) was a voluntary nutrition labeling program developed by the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada as a guide to help consumers choose healthy foods. Items meeting nutrient criteria were identified with a HC symbol. This study examined the impact of the program on differences in consumer awareness and use of nutritional information in restaurants. Exit surveys were conducted with 1126 patrons outside four HC and four comparison restaurants in Ontario, Canada (2013). Surveys assessed participant noticing of nutrition information, influence of nutrition information on menu selection, and nutrient intake. Significantly more patrons at HC restaurants noticed nutrition information than at comparison restaurants (34.2% vs. 28.1%; OR = 1.39; p = 0.019); however, only 5% of HC restaurant patrons recalled seeing the HC symbol. HC restaurant patrons were more likely to say that their order was influenced by nutrition information (10.9% vs. 4.5%; OR = 2.96, p < 0.001); and consumed less saturated fat and carbohydrates, and more protein and fibre (p < 0.05). Approximately 15% of HC restaurant patrons ordered HC approved items; however, only 1% ordered a HC item and mentioned seeing the symbol in the restaurant in an unprompted recall task, and only 4% ordered a HC item and reported seeing the symbol on the item when asked directly. The HC program was associated with greater levels of noticing and influence of nutrition information, and more favourable nutrient intake; however, awareness of the HC program was very low and differences most likely reflect the type of restaurants that "self-selected" into the program.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".