CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT04340791Updated Nov 3, 2020

Increased Proportion of Lower Energy Density Items vs. Nutritional Labelling at an Online Supermarket

An interventional study of Increased proportion of lower energy density items and Labelling in Diet, Healthy and Food Selection, sponsored by University of Liverpool. Completed at 1 site in United Kingdom. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2020-11-03.

Sponsored by University of Liverpool · Not applicable, Interventional, and Prevention

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
1,000
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study will be a 2x2 randomised controlled trial with information-based intervention (no labelling / labelling) and structural intervention (default proportion / increased proportion of lower energy density food items) as between-subject factors and energy density (kcal/g) of food purchases during an online supermarket-shopping task as dependent variable. This study will use an online supermarket platform developed to mimic an online supermarket website and participants will be asked to complete a shopping task using a pre-determined shopping list of 10 items.

Read the detailed description

See attached protocol documents.

02

Conditions studied

  • Diet, Healthy
  • Food Selection

Keywords

  • availability
  • labelling
  • food choice
  • socio-economic position
03

In context

Lead sponsor

University of Liverpool is the lead sponsor of 99 studies on the registry; 10 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

  • United Kingdom residents
  • Aged ≥ 18 years
  • Fluent in English
  • Have access to a computer and Internet
  • Responsible for a substantial proportion of household grocery shopping

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Unable to provide informed consent and to comply with the study requirements
  • Any dietary restriction (vegetarian, vegan, gluten-free, sugar-free, dairy or lactose free, food allergy, other)
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
1,000 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • No intervention
    Default proportion & no labelling

    No intervention: Default proportion condition (33% lower energy density items - 67% higher energy density items). Lower energy density items will be defined as lower ED ≤ median of ED distribution within a food category. No labelling.

  • Experimental
    Default proportion & labelling

    When energy density of a food item ≤ median of energy density distribution within a food category, "healthier choice" badges will be added to the food item pictures on the online supermarket. Instructions will introduce the badges to the participants as "In the online supermarket, the green tick allows you to see which products (e.g. muesli) in each product category (e.g. cereals) are healthier choices with fewer calories per gram than most other products in the same category."

    Behavioral: Labelling

  • Experimental
    Increased proportion & no labelling

    The proportion of lower energy density items vs. higher energy density items will be reversed (67% lower - 33% higher) relative to the default proportion condition (33% lower - 67% higher). Lower energy density items will be defined as lower ED ≤ median of ED distribution within a food category.

    Behavioral: Increased proportion of lower energy density items

  • Experimental
    Increased proportion & labelling

    The proportion of lower energy density items vs. higher energy density items will be reversed (67% lower - 33% higher) relative to the default proportion condition (33% lower - 67% higher). Lower energy density items will be defined as lower ED ≤ median of ED distribution within a food category. When energy density of a food item ≤ median of energy density distribution within a food category, "healthier choice" badges will be added to the food item pictures on the online supermarket. Instructions will introduce the badges to the participants as "In the online supermarket, the green tick allows you to see which products (e.g. muesli) in each product category (e.g. cereals) are healthier choices with fewer calories per gram than most other products in the same category."

    Behavioral: Increased proportion of lower energy density items · Behavioral: Labelling

Interventions

  • BehavioralIncreased proportion of lower energy density items

    The proportion of lower energy density vs. higher energy density items will be reversed (67% lower - 33% higher) relative to the default proportion condition (D and DL) (33% lower - 67% higher). Lower energy density items will be defined as lower energy density ≤ median of energy density distribution within a food category.

  • BehavioralLabelling

    When energy density of an item ≤ median of ED distribution within a food category, "healthier choice" badges will be added to the food item pictures on the online supermarket. Instructions when logging-into the platform will introduce the badges to the participants: "In the online supermarket, the green tick allows you to see which products (e.g. muesli) in each product category (e.g. cereals) are healthier choices with fewer calories per gram than most other products in the same category."

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Mean ED of the food items purchased (kcal/100g)

    Calculated as the sum of the energy of the purchased items (kcal) divided by the sum of their weight (g) and multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: 20 minutes (the time frame denotes time taken to make the food shopping task online and there is no follow up)

Secondary outcomes

  1. Total energy of the food items purchased (kcal)

    Calculated as the sum of the energy of the purchased items (kcal)

    Time frame: 20 minutes (the time frame denotes time taken to make the food shopping task online and there is no follow up)

  2. Energy from total sugar (% of total energy)

    Calculated as the percentage of total energy of the purchased items from total sugar

    Time frame: 20 minutes (the time frame denotes time taken to make the food shopping task online and there is no follow up)

  3. Energy from saturated fatty acids (SFA) (% of total energy)

    Calculated as the percentage of total energy of the purchased items from SFA

    Time frame: 20 minutes (the time frame denotes time taken to make the food shopping task online and there is no follow up)

  4. Salt content (g/100g)

    Calculated as the sum of the salt content of the purchased items (g) divided by the sum of their weight (g) and multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: 20 minutes (the time frame denotes time taken to make the food shopping task online and there is no follow up)

  5. Proportion of lower energy density food items in the basket of foods purchased

    Lower energy density items will be defined as ≤ median of energy density distribution within a food category

    Time frame: 20 minutes (the time frame denotes time taken to make the food shopping task online and there is no follow up)

  6. Cost (GPB)

    Calculated as the sum of the prices of the purchased items

    Time frame: 20 minutes (the time frame denotes time taken to make the food shopping task online and there is no follow up)

Other outcomes

  1. Validity

    Mean of item "I would normally buy \[the 10 items on the shopping list\]" for all the food items coded as: 1 = Never; 2 = Very rarely; 3 = Rarely; 4 = Occasionally; 5 = Frequently; 6 = Very frequently.

    Time frame: 5 minutes (the time frame denotes time taken to fill in the debriefing questionnaire and there is no follow up)

  2. Kcal influence

    Answer to the item "The choices I made during online shopping were influenced by how many calories I thought were in the options available." coded as: 1 = Strongly disagree; 2 = Disagree; 3 = Slightly disagree; 4 = Neutral; 5 = Slightly agree; 6 = Agree; 7 = Strongly agree

    Time frame: 5 minutes (the time frame denotes time taken to fill in the debriefing questionnaire and there is no follow up)

07

Study locations

1 site
  • University of Liverpool
    Liverpool, Merseyside L69 7ZA, United Kingdom
08

References and documents

Study documents

  • Protocol, analysis plan and consent form · Apr 7, 2020

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — Shared on the Open Science Framework

Supporting information: Study protocol, Sap, Icf

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Nov 3, 2020, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04340791
Lead sponsor
University of Liverpool
Responsible party
Eric Robinson (Principal Investigator, University of Liverpool) — Principal investigator
First posted
Apr 10, 2020
Start date
Apr 13, 2020
Primary completion
Apr 13, 2020
Completion
May 13, 2020
Last update
Nov 3, 2020

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Nov 2020. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion