MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034470146 · doi:10.1017/s0029665120006667

The impact of proposed nutrient criteria for the display of mandatory front-of-package ‘high-in’ symbols in the Canadian prepackaged foods supply

2020· article· en· W3034470146 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mary R. L’Abbé, Anthea Christoforou, Christine Mulligan, Laura Vergeer, Jodi T. Bernstein

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of The Nutrition Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicConsumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLabellingAdded sugarFood scienceNutrition facts labelSymbol (formal)NutrientBusinessSugarChemistryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Front-of-package (FOP) nutrition labelling has become a core component of policy recommendations to address the growing burden of diet-related non-communicable disease globally. The CODEX Committee on Food Labelling is in the process of establishing standardized criteria for the definition of “high-in” for use with FOP labels highlighting excessive amounts of fats, sugars and sodium in foods. Recently, as part of Health Canada's Healthy Eating Strategy , regulations requiring the mandatory display of high-in FOP symbols have been published. The aim of this study was to investigate the extent to which these symbols would appear on foods and beverages in the Canadian prepackaged food supply, both overall and by food category. Methods: Foods and beverages in the University of Toronto's Food Label Information Program database 2013 (n = 15,277) were assessed for the prevalence of products that would have to display a symbol based on criteria published in the draft Canadian regulations. The criteria include thresholds based on the % Daily Value (DV) for each nutrient, above which, products would be required to display a FOP symbol for that nutrient. Exemptions are provided for fruits and vegetables without added sodium, sugars, or saturated fats, non-flavoured whole or partly skimmed milk, eggs, sweetening agents (i.e. sugar, honey, syrups and molasses) and table salt. Results: 61.7% (n = 10,251) of products would be required to display at least one symbol. Of these, 52.3% (n = 5,358) would have a sodium symbol, 41.9% (n = 4,295) a saturated fats symbol and 41.0% (n = 4,207) a sugars symbol. Overall, 37% of products would display a symbol for more than one nutrient. The highest concentration of symbols were found on processed meats (93.8%), soups (93.0%), desserts (87.2%), sugars and sweets (82.3%), dairy (76.9%) and bakery products (71.0%). Discussion: This is the first study to evaluate the impact of proposed regulations for the mandatory display of FOP symbols on Canadian prepackaged foods. Findings identify a high concentration of symbols in categories contributing meaningfully to dietary sodium, sugars, and saturated fats intakes, but also in categories for which consumption is discouraged in national dietary guidelines (e.g. processed meats, desserts). The findings presented here will inform ongoing discussions on how best to optimize criteria underpinning the display of FOP “high-in” labels.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.311
Threshold uncertainty score0.836

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of The Nutrition SocietySame topicConsumer Attitudes and Food LabelingFrench-language works237,207