To evaluate the application of front-of-package (FOP) labelling regulations to menu labelling in the Canadian restaurant sector by assessing the proportion of menu items that would be required to display the ‘high-in’ FOP symbol if the policy were extended to the restaurant sector.

Nutrition information of 18 760 menu items was collected from 141 chain restaurants in Canada. Menu items were evaluated using the mandatory FOP labelling regulations promulgated in Canada Gazette II by Health Canada in July of 2022.

Chain restaurants with ≥20 establishments in Canada.

Canadian chain restaurant menu items including beverages, desserts, entrées, sides and starters.

Overall, 77 % of menu items in the Canadian restaurant sector would display a ‘high-in’ FOP symbol. Among these menu items, 43 % would display ‘high-in’ one nutrient, 54 % would display ‘high-in’ two and 3 % would display ‘high-in’ all three nutrients-of-concern. By nutrient, 52 % were ‘high-in’ sodium, and 24 and 47 % were ‘high-in’ total sugars and saturated fat, respectively.

Given the poor nutritional quality of restaurant foods, the current regulations, if applied to restaurant foods, would result in most menu items displaying a FOP symbol. Therefore, expanding the Canadian FOP labelling regulations to the restaurant sector can be key to ensuring a healthy food environment for Canadians. Furthermore, menu labelling along with other multi-faceted approaches such as reformulation targets are necessary to improve the dietary intake of Canadians from restaurant foods.

It is unknown how well menu labelling schemes that enforce the display of kilojoule (kJ) labelling at point-of-sale have been implemented on online food delivery (OFD) services in Australia. This study aimed to examine the prevalence of kJ labelling on the online menus of large food outlets with more than twenty locations in the state or fifty locations nationally. A secondary aim was to evaluate the nutritional quality of menu items on OFD from mid-sized outlets that have fewer locations than what is specified in the current scheme.

Cross-sectional analysis. Prevalence of kJ labelling by large food outlets on OFD from August to September 2022 was examined. Proportion of discretionary (‘junk food’) items on menus from mid-sized outlets was assessed.

Forty-three unique large food outlets on company (e.g. MyMacca’s) and third party OFD (Uber Eats, Menulog, Deliveroo) within Sydney, Australia. Ninety-two mid-sized food outlets were analysed.

N/A.

On company OFD apps, 35 % (7/23) had complete kJ labelling for each menu item. In comparison, only 4·8 % (2/42), 5·3 % (2/38) and 3·6 % (1/28) of large outlets on Uber Eats, Menulog and Deliveroo had complete kJ labelling at all locations, respectively. Over three-quarters, 76·3 % (345/452) of menu items from mid-sized outlets were classified as discretionary.

Kilojoule labelling was absent or incomplete on a high proportion of online menus. Mid-sized outlets have abundant discretionary choices and yet escape criteria for mandatory menu labelling laws. Our findings show the need to further monitor the implementation of nutrition policies on OFD.

Federal law requires calorie information on chain restaurant menus. We sought to assess the prevalence of calorie disclosures on online menus and determine if the menus are controlled by restaurants subject to US labelling requirements.

Cross-sectional

Restaurant websites and mobile apps for restaurant located in New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston

US chain restaurants (top seventy-five by number of outlets) and third-party platforms (TPP): Grubhub, Uber Eats, DoorDash

There was at least one calorie disclosure (for at least one food or beverage, in at least one location) on sixty-eight of seventy-two (94 %) menus on restaurant websites or apps, thirty-two of fifty-five (58 %) menus on DoorDash, six of forty-nine (12 %) menus on Grubhub and thirty of fifty-nine (51 %) menus on Uber Eats. There was consistent calorie labelling (all foods and beverages, all locations) on forty-three of seventy-two (60 %) menus on restaurant websites or apps, fifteen of fifty-five (27 %) menus on DoorDash, three of forty-nine (6 %) menus on Grubhub and eleven of fifty-nine (19 %) menus on Uber Eats. Only four restaurant chains consistently labelled calories for all items, in all locations, on all platforms where their menus were found. All three TPP provided restaurants the ability to enter and modify menu items, making the menus subject to US labelling requirements. Only Uber Eats provided guidance to restaurants on entering calorie information.

As consumers increasingly rely on TPP for restaurant ordering, menus on these platforms should include calories in order to promote transparency and nutrition.

To evaluate if the inclusion of nutritional warnings in food ordering websites can discourage consumers from purchasing foods with excessive content of nutrients associated with non-communicable diseases (NCD).

Participants were randomly assigned to one of the two experimental conditions: control (n 225) or nutritional warnings (n 222). Nutritional warnings corresponded to separate black octagonal signs containing the word ‘Excess’ followed by the corresponding nutrient: total fat, saturated fat, sugars and sodium. Participants were asked to purchase a lunch for themselves using a simulated food ordering website.

Online study in Uruguay.

Convenience sample of 447 Uruguayan participants, recruited using social media.

In the control condition, 76 % of the participants selected a dish or a beverage with excessive content of at least one nutrient in the simulated food ordering website. When nutritional warnings were included, this percentage significantly decreased to 62 % (P = 0·002). In addition, nutritional warnings caused a significant reduction in the percentage of participants who selected dishes with excessive content of total fat: 50 % v. 62 % (P = 0·012).

Results from the present work provide preliminary evidence that the inclusion of nutritional warnings in food ordering websites could discourage consumers from selecting dishes and beverages with excessive content of nutrients associated with NCD.

To understand the different Na menu labelling approaches that have been considered by state and local policymakers in the USA and to summarise the evidence on the relationship between Na menu labelling and Na content of menu items offered by restaurants or purchased by consumers.

Proposed and enacted Na menu labelling laws at the state and local levels were reviewed using legal databases and an online search, and a narrative review of peer-reviewed literature was conducted on the relationship between Na menu labelling and Na content of menu items offered by restaurants or purchased by consumers.

Local and state jurisdictions in the USA

Not applicable.

Between 2000 and 2020, thirty-eight laws – eleven at the local level and twenty-seven at the state level – were proposed to require Na labelling of restaurant menu items. By 2020, eight laws were enacted requiring chain restaurants to label the Na content of menu items. Five studies were identified that evaluated the impact of Na menu labelling on Na content of menu items offered by restaurants or purchased by consumers in the USA. The studies had mixed results: two studies showed a statistically significant association between Na menu labelling and reduced Na content of menu items; three showed no effects.

Data suggest that Na menu labelling may reduce Na in restaurant menu items, but further rigorous research evaluating Na menu labelling effects on Na content of menu items, as well as on the Na content in menu items purchased by consumers, is needed.

Take-away foods account for a significant proportion of dietary intake among young adults (18–35 years). Young adults want nutrition information at the point-of-purchase (POP); however, it is either unavailable, perceived as ineffective or difficult to use. The present study examined whether symbols on university food outlet menus identifying healthier options would increase their sales and consumer’s awareness of these symbols, purchasing factors and barriers to eating healthy foods.

Repeated-measures, comparison group, quasi-experimental study.

Two carefully matched university food outlets were analysed to determine the targeted items. Tick symbols ✓ were placed next to the targeted items in the experimental outlet. No changes were made at the comparison outlet. Customers were surveyed at the experimental outlet. Food sales were collected for 4 weeks from both outlets at baseline and during the intervention. Food sales were also collected from the experimental outlet 10 weeks later.

Food outlet patrons.

Significant increases in food sales were observed during observation 3 compared with observation 1 (P = 0·0004) and observation 2 (P = 0·0002). Sixty-eight per cent of respondents noticed the symbols, and of that, 30 % reported being influenced. Taste was the most common purchasing factor, and people were less likely to select taste as a factor if they were influenced by the symbols (P = 0·04).

Identifying healthier options with a symbol at the POP increased sales over time. Several purchasing factors (price, taste and healthy food availability) need to be addressed to improve the food selection of young adults.

Test the efficacy and perceived effectiveness of nutrition labels on children’s menus from a full-service chain restaurant in an online study.

Using a between-groups experiment, parents were randomised to view children’s menus displaying one of five children’s nutrition labelling conditions: (i) No Nutrition Information (control); (ii) Calories Only; (iii) Calories + Contextual Statement (CS); (iv) Calories, Sodium + CS; or (v) Calories and Sodium in Traffic Lights + CS. Parents hypothetically ordered up to one entrée, side, beverage and dessert for their child, then rated and ranked all five labelling conditions on the level of perceived effectiveness.

Online survey.

998 parents with a 3–12 year old child.

Parents exposed to menus displaying ‘Calories, Sodium + CS’ selected significantly fewer calories ‘overall’ (entrées + side + dessert + beverage) compared to parents exposed to the control condition (−53·1 calories, P < 0·05). Parents selected ‘entrees’ with significantly fewer calories and lower sodium when exposed to menus with ‘Calories + CS’ (−24·3 calories, P < 0·05); ‘Calories, Sodium + CS’ (−25·4 calories, −56·1 mg sodium, P < 0·05 for both); and ‘Calories and Sodium in Traffic Lights + CS’ (−29·1 calories, −58·6 mg sodium, P < 0·05 for both). Parents exposed to menus with ‘Calories, Sodium + CS’ and ‘Calories and Sodium in Traffic Lights + CS’ were more likely to notice and understand nutrition information compared to other nuntrition labelling conditions. Parents perceived the menu with ‘Calories and Sodium in Traffic Lights + CS’ as most effective (P < 0·05).

Menus disclosing calories, sodium and a contextual statement increased the proportion of parents who noticed and understood nutrition information, and resulted in parents selecting lower calorie and sodium entrées for their children in the hypothetical purchase task.

To investigate the uptake of and attitudes towards a voluntary government-led energy (calorie) menu labelling initiative in Ireland among a representative sample of food-service businesses and to inform further actions that may need to be undertaken to facilitate successful implementation.

A mixed-methods approach, incorporating a national telephone survey, structured observation visits and semi-structured interviews.

Twenty-six counties in the Republic of Ireland.

A random selection of food-service businesses (n 604) participated in the telephone survey. Businesses which indicated that they did display calories were selected to participate in structured observation visits (n 42), along with a random sample (n 38) of businesses that did not display calories. A purposive sample of thirteen food-service business owners who participated in the telephone survey participated in semi-structured interviews.

In the telephone survey, 7 % (n 42) of food businesses reported displaying calories and the observation visits revealed that of these businesses, 10 % (n 4) were not displaying calorie information. Three major themes emerged from the semi-structured interviews: uncertainty, impact on business and consumer nutrition knowledge. Participants expressed concerns regarding inaccuracies in the calorie information, cost and time implications, mistrust in the food-service industry and poor nutritional knowledge among consumers. These concerns impeded the implementing of calorie menu labelling.

A multifactorial approach that incorporates guidance and support (training/tax incentives), practical assistance (user-friendly calorie calculation software), a reasonable legislative structure and a standardised monitoring system is needed to facilitate the successful implementation of calorie menu labelling.

The present study examined the energy (kilojoule) content of Australian fast-food menu items over seven years, before and after introduction of menu board labelling, to determine the impact of the introduction of the legislation.

Analysis of the median energy contents per serving and per 100g of fast-food menu items. Change in energy content of menu items across the years surveyed and differences in energy content of standard and limited-time only menu items were analysed.

Five of Australia’s largest fast food chains: Hungry Jack’s, KFC, McDonald’s, Oporto and Red Rooster.

All standard and limited-time only menu items available at each fast-food chain, collected annually for seven years, 2009–2015.

Although some fast-food chains/menu item categories had significant increases in the energy contents of their menus at some time points during the 7-year period, overall there were no significant or systematic decreases in energy following the introduction of menu labelling (P=0·19 by +17 kJ/100 g, P=0·83 by +8 kJ/serving). Limited-time only items were significantly higher in median energy content per 100 g than standard menu items (+74 kJ/100 g, P=0·002).

While reformulation across the entire Australian fast-food supply has the potential to positively influence population nutrient intake, the introduction of menu labelling legislation in New South Wales, Australia did not lead to reduced energy contents across the five fast-food chains. To encourage widespread reformulation by the fast-food industry and enhance the impact of labelling legislation, the government should work with industry to set targets for reformulation of nutrient content.

To assess parental awareness of per-meal energy (calorie) recommendations for children’s restaurant meals and to explore whether calorie awareness was associated with parental sociodemographic characteristics and frequency of eating restaurant food.

Cross-sectional online survey administered in July 2014. Parents estimated calories (i.e. kilocalories; 1 kcal=4·184 kJ) recommended for a child’s lunch/dinner restaurant meal (range: 0–2000 kcal). Responses were categorized as ‘underestimate’ (<400 kcal), ‘accurate’ (400–600 kcal) and ‘overestimate’ (>600 kcal). Confidence in response was measured on a 4-point scale from ‘very unsure’ to ‘very sure’. Logistic regressions estimated the odds of an ‘accurate’ response and confident response (‘somewhat’ or ‘very sure’) by parental sociodemographic characteristics and frequency of eating from restaurants. Sampling weights based on demographics were incorporated in all analyses.

USA.

Parents (n 1207) of 5–12-year-old children.

On average, parents estimated 631 (se 19·4) kcal as the appropriate amount for a 5–12-year-old child’s meal. Thirty-five per cent answered in the accurate range, while 33·3 and 31·8 % underestimated and overestimated, respectively. Frequent dining at restaurants, lower income and urban geography were associated with lower odds of answering accurately. Parents’ confidence in their estimates was low across the sample (26·0 % confident) and only 10·1 % were both accurate and confident.

Parent education about calorie recommendations for children could improve understanding and use of menu labelling information in restaurants. Targeted strategies are recommended to ensure that such efforts address, rather than exacerbate, health disparities.

According to the US Affordable Care Act, restaurant chains are required to provide energy (calorie) and other nutrition information on their menu. The current study examined the impact of menu labelling containing calorie information and recommended daily calorie intake, along with subjective nutrition knowledge, on intention to select lower-calorie foods prior to the implementation of the Affordable Care Act.

Full factorial experimental design with participants exposed to four variants of a sample menu in a 2 (presence v. absence of calorie information) ×2 (presence v. absence of recommended daily calorie intake).

Large, public university in the Southwest USA.

Primarily undergraduate college students.

Majority of participants were 19–23 years of age (mean 21·8 (sd 3·6) years). Menu information about calorie content and respondents’ subjective nutrition knowledge had a significantly positive impact on students’ intention to select lower-calorie foods (β=0·24, P<0·001 and β=0·33, P<0·001, respectively); however, recommended daily calorie intake information on the menu board did not influence students’ intention to select lower-calorie foods (β=0·10, P=0·105). Gender played a significant role on purchase intent for lower-calorie menu items, with females more affected by the calorie information than males (β=0·37, P<0·001).

Findings support the role menu labelling can play in encouraging a healthier lifestyle for college students. College students who are Generation Y desire healthier menu options and accept nutritional labels on restaurant menus as a way to easily and expediently obtain nutrition information.

Menu labelling is a practical tool to inform consumers of the energy content of menu items and help consumers make informed decisions in the eating-out environment, and the volume of studies published recently regarding its effects is expanding, both quantitatively and geographically. The aim of the present review and meta-analysis is to consider the most recent evidence which assesses the effect of menu labelling regarding changes in energy consumed, ordered or selected in both real-world and experimental settings.

The review included fifteen peer-reviewed, full-text articles published between 2012 and 2014. Pertinent methodological information was extracted from each of the included studies and a quality assessment scheme was applied to classify the studies, after which systematic across-study comparisons were conducted. A meta-analysis was conducted including twelve of the fifteen studies, and stratified according to type of research setting and outcome: energy consumed, ordered or selected.

The rating yielded studies categorized by study quality: good (n 3), fair (n 9) and weak (n 3). Overall nine studies showed statistically significant reductions in energy consumed, ordered or selected. Three articles reported no effect of menu labelling. The meta-analysis showed statistically significant effects of menu labelling: overall energy consumed was reduced by a mean of 419·5 kJ (100·2 kcal) and energy ordered in real-world settings decreased by a mean of 325·7 kJ (77·8 kcal).

The review supports that menu labelling can effectively reduce energy ordered and consumed in the away-from-home food environment.

Menu labelling has been identified as a potential strategy to help individuals make healthier choices when eating out. Although adolescents eat out often, little research involving menu labelling has been conducted with this population. The objectives of the present study were to: (i) gather qualitative information from adolescents regarding use of menu labels when eating out; (ii) gather adolescents’ suggestions for optimal ways to design menu labels; and (iii) examine differences between adolescents living in communities of different socio-economic status.

Qualitative. Five focus groups of five to ten participants.

Austin, TX, USA, 2012.

Forty-one adolescents living in diverse communities recruited using a snowballing technique at public and private recreation centres (twenty-four females; twenty-two African American).

Participants reported that menu labelling, in general, does not influence food selections when eating out. Among participants living in low-income communities, food purchases were based on price, taste and familiarity. Among participants living in high-income areas, food purchases were based on quality and ability to satiate (among boys). According to participants, effective ways to present menu labels are by matching calorie levels with physical activity equivalents or through simple graphics.

For adolescents, providing menu labels in their current format may not be an effective strategy to increase healthy food selection. Given that the current menu label format has been set by federal policy in the USA cannot be easily changed, research to determine how this format can be best presented or enhanced so that it can have an impact on all US sub-populations is warranted.

Energy (calorie) ranges currently appear on menu boards for customized menu items and will likely appear throughout the USA when menu-labelling legislation is implemented. Consumer welfare advocates have questioned whether energy ranges enable accurate energy estimates. In four studies, we examined: (i) whether energy range information improves energy estimation accuracy; (ii) whether misestimates persist because consumers misinterpret the meaning of the energy range end points; and (iii) whether energy estimates can be made more accurate by providing explicit information about the contents of items at the end points.

Four studies were conducted, all randomized experiments.

Study 1 took place outside a Chipotle restaurant. Studies 2 to 4 took place online.

Participants in study 1 were customers exiting a Chipotle restaurant (n 306). Participants in studies 2 (n 205), 3 (n 290) and 4 (n 874) were from an online panel.

Energy ranges reduced energy misestimation across different menu items (studies 1–4). One cause of remaining misestimation was misinterpretation of the low end point’s meaning (study 2). Providing explicit information about the contents of menu items associated with energy range end points further reduced energy misestimation (study 3) across different menu items (study 4).

Energy range information improved energy estimation accuracy and defining the meaning of the end points further improved accuracy. We suggest that when restaurants present energy range information to consumers, they should explicitly define the meaning of the end points.

Food prepared and consumed away from home accounts for a significant proportion of dietary intake among Canadians. Currently, Canadians receive little or no nutrition information when eating in restaurant and fast-food outlets. The present study examined the impact of nutrition information on menus in hospital cafeterias on noticing and perceived influence of nutrition information and on food consumption.

Cross-sectional surveys.

Exit surveys (n 1003) were conducted in two hospital cafeterias. The ‘intervention’ site featured energy (calorie), sodium and fat content on digital menu boards, as well as a health logo for ‘healthier’ items. The intervention site had also revised its menu items to improve the nutrient profiles. The ‘control’ site provided limited nutrition information at the point of sale.

Cafeteria patrons recruited using the intercept technique.

Significantly more respondents at the intervention site reported noticing nutrition information (OR = 7·6, P < 0·001) and using nutrition information to select their food items (OR = 3·3, P < 0·001) compared with patrons at the control site, after adjusting for sociodemographic factors. Patrons at the intervention site consumed significantly less energy (−21 %, P < 0·001), sodium (−23 %, P < 0·001), saturated fat (−33 %, P < 0·001) and total fat (−37 %, P < 0·001) than patrons at the control site.

A nutritional programme, including nutrition information on menus and improved nutrition profile of food offerings, was associated with substantial reductions in energy, sodium and fat consumption. The results are consistent with a positive impact of menu labelling.

Some versions of restaurant menu labelling legislation do not require energy information to be posted on menus for drive-through lanes. The present study was designed to quantify the number of customers who purchase fast food through drive-in windows as a means of informing legislative labelling efforts.

This was an observational study.

The study took place at two McDonald’s and Burger King restaurants, and single Dairy Queen, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Taco Bell and Wendy’s restaurants.

The number of customers entering the chain restaurants and purchasing food via the drive-through lane were recorded. A total of 3549 patrons were observed.

The percentage of customers who made their purchases at drive-throughs was fifty-seven. The overall average (57 %) is likely a conservative estimate because some fast-food restaurants have late-night hours when only the drive-throughs are open.

Since nearly six in ten customers purchase food via the drive-through lanes, menu labelling legislation should mandate the inclusion of menu labels on drive-through menu boards to maximise the impact of this public health intervention.

The present study examines the receptivity to and potential effects of menu labelling on food choices of low-income and minority individuals – a group often at disproportionate risk for preventable, lifestyle-related health conditions (e.g. obesity, diabetes and CVD).

We conducted a cross-sectional survey to examine the knowledge, attitudes and potential response to menu labelling in an urban public health clinic population.

United States.

A total of 639 clinic patients were recruited in the waiting rooms of six, large public health centres in Los Angeles County (2007–2008). These centres provide services to a largely uninsured or under-insured, low-income, Latino and African-American population.

Among those approached and who met eligibility criteria, 88 % completed the survey. Of the 639 respondents, 55 % were overweight or obese based on self-reported heights and weights; 74 % reported visiting a fast food restaurant at least once in the past year, including 22 % at least once a week; 93 % thought that calorie information was ‘important’; and 86 % thought that restaurants should be required to post calorie information on their menu boards. In multivariate analyses, respondents who were obese, female, Latino and supportive of calorie postings were more likely than others to report that they would choose food and beverages with lower calories as a result of menu labelling.

These findings suggest that clinic patients are receptive to this population-based strategy and that they would be inclined to change their food selections in response to menu labelling.