MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7163087821

Effects of Food Advertising on Youth’s Eating Behavior: A Systematic Review of Longitudinal Studies

2025· article· en· W7163087821 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ángela-Justine González Geuder, Natalia Martín‐María

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Electronic library online (Sciences Carlos III Health Institute) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicConsumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsycINFOConsumption (sociology)Unhealthy foodTelevision advertisingDigital advertisingFood consumptionLongitudinal studySystematic review
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background:Previous cross-sectional studies have found a positive relationship between commercial audiovisual media viewing and youth overweight/obesity, suggesting that advertising of low-nutritional-value products (LNVP) influences unhealthy food consumption patterns. The objective of this study was to analyze the long-term influence of LNVP advertising on children’s and adolescents’ consumption habits.Method:A systematic literature review following PRISMA guidelines examined the long-term effects of LNVP advertising on youth’s diet-related outcomes. A search in PubMed and PsycINFO (June 2024) included studies from the last 12 years exploring the relationship between digital food advertising and subsequent consumption behaviors. Two authors independently screened and assessed studies using an adapted Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results: Findings were inconclusive, with six of twelve studies reporting a positive relationship, while the other six found no association. Conclusions: LNVP advertising does not enhance youth’s food choices or nutritional knowledge. Its impact on diet appears limited and may depend on other factors, such as parental nutritional knowledge.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.006
Bibliometrics0.0070.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Electronic library online (Sciences Carlos III Health Institute)Same topicConsumer Attitudes and Food LabelingFrench-language works237,207