Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Canada’s food supply is abundant in less healthy products, increasing Canadians’ risk of obesity and non-communicable diseases. Food companies strongly influence the food supply; however, no studies have examined differences in the healthfulness of products offered by various companies in Canada. This study aimed to compare the nutritional quality of products offered by the top packaged food and beverage companies in Canada. Methods Twenty-two top packaged food and beverage manufacturing companies were selected, representing > 50% of the Canadian market share in 2018. Nutritional information for products ( n  = 8277) was sourced from the University of Toronto Food Label Information Program 2017 database. Descriptive analyses examined the nutritional quality of products based on: 1) the Health Star Rating (HSR) system; 2) calories, sodium, saturated fat and total sugars per 100 g (or mL) and per reference amounts (RAs) defined by Health Canada; and 3) “high in” thresholds for sodium, saturated fat and total sugars proposed by Health Canada for pending front-of-package labelling regulations. Kruskal-Wallis tests compared HSRs of products between companies. Results Mean HSRs of companies’ total product offerings ranged from 1.9 to 3.6 (out of 5.0). Differences in HSRs of products between companies were significant overall and for 19 of 22 food categories ( P  < 0.05), particularly for fats/oils and beverages. Calories, sodium, saturated fat and total sugars contents varied widely between companies for several food categories, and depending on whether they were examined per 100 g (or mL) or RA. Additionally, 66.4% of all products exceeded ≥1 of Health Canada’s “high in” thresholds for sodium (31.7%), saturated fat (28.3%) and/or sugars (28.4%). The proportion of products offered by a company that exceeded at least one of these thresholds ranged from 38.5 to 97.5%. Conclusions The nutritional quality of products offered by leading packaged food and beverage manufacturers in Canada differs significantly overall and by food category, with many products considered less healthy according to multiple nutrient profiling methods. Variation within food categories illustrates the need and potential for companies to improve the healthfulness of their products. Identifying companies that offer less healthy products compared with others in Canada may help prompt reformulation.

Background Food labelling is a common intervention to improve diets, where the back-of-pack Nutrition Information Panel (or Nutrition Facts table (NFt)) provides comprehensive nutrition information on food packages. However, many consumers find it difficult and time-consuming to identify healthier foods using the NFt. As a result, different interpretative nutrition rating systems (INRS) may enable healthier food choices and it is essential that consumers have the tools to allow for easily accessible nutrition information. The objective of this study was to examine consumers’ perceptions of different (INRS) for delivery of nutrition information using different versions of a smartphone app, FoodFlip©. Methods This study was part of a larger randomized controlled trial examining consumer perceptions of different INRS on food products. A nationally representative commercial sample of 2008 Canadians were randomized to one of four INRS intervention groups: 1) traffic light, 2) health star rating, 3) ‘high-in’ warning labels or 4) no INRS (NFt only; control) and asked to scan or enter 20 products into FoodFlip© from a list of food products provided to them with varying levels of healthfulness. After completing the app task, participants were asked a series of 7-point Likert-scale and open-ended questions to provide opinions on the usability and functionality of the app. Results Of the survey sample of 1997 participants, 95% ( n  = 1907) completed the app task, with similar number of participants in each treatment group. The mean age was 40 ± 12 years with no differences in sociodemographic characteristics between treatment groups. The health star rating ranked significantly lower in comparison to the other treatment groups in terms of usefulness (OR, 95% CI -0.67, 0.52–0.85), believability (0.59, 0.46–0.75), and understanding (0.55, 0.44–0.71) ( p  < 0.001). The health star rating (1.20, 0.94–1.53) and control (NFt) (1,1,1) ranked significantly lower than the traffic light or the ‘high-in’ warning labels for their ability to compare the healthfulness of products ( p  < 0.001). Conclusion This study demonstrated Canadian consumers’ preference for a nutrient-specific system (i.e. traffic light or ‘high-in’ warning labels). The app, which was liked by majority of the participants for its functionality and usability, has the potential to support healthy dietary decision making and may also encourage reformulation. Trial registration NCT03290118 (Clinicaltrials.gov).

IntroductionSchools are an important setting for supporting children’s development of food literacy, but minimal research has assessed which strategies are most suitable for school nutrition education. The Foodbot Factory intervention, consisting of serious game (ie, a digital game designed for education) and curriculum-based lesson plans, was developed to support teachers and children ages 8–12 with nutrition education. Pilot data have demonstrated that Foodbot Factory can significantly improve children’s nutrition knowledge, but it has not yet been evaluated in classrooms.Methods and analysisA single-blinded cluster randomised controlled trial was designed in 2022 by a research team based at Ontario Tech University to determine the efficacy of the Foodbot Factory intervention in improving children’s nutrition knowledge, attitudes and behaviours. 32 grade 4 and 4/5 classrooms in Ontario will be randomised to receive (1) the Foodbot Factory intervention or (2) a control nutrition education intervention using conventional materials (eg, activity sheets). The study’s primary outcome is to determine the overall nutrition knowledge acquired from the intervention. Secondary outcomes include nutrition knowledge subscores (ie, knowledge of specific food groups), nutrition attitudes, dietary intake, general nutrition behaviours (eg, eating breakfast) and intervention acceptability. An Ontario-certified teacher will deliver the intervention to both groups for 35–40 min/day for five consecutive days. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, immediately postintervention, and 4 weeks and 3 months postintervention using the Nutrition Attitudes and Knowledge questionnaire, the Block Kids Food Screener, a modified Family Nutrition and Physical Activity screener and an acceptability questionnaire. Generalised linear mixed models will assess changes in outcomes between groups.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol is approved by research ethics boards at Ontario Tech University and participating school boards. Results of the trial will be published in peer-reviewed journals and lay summaries will be available to stakeholders.Trial registration number NCT05979259.

Improving children's food literacy through school-based interventions can support developing healthy eating habits. However, teachers lack appropriate resources, time, and training to provide nutrition education in schools. Serious games, which are games designed for a purpose other than entertainment, have been demonstrated to improve children's food literacy and dietary intake and can address the barriers teachers face in providing nutrition education. Foodbot Factory (Arcand Lab) is a nutrition education intervention that is aligned with curricula and uses a serious game to provide nutrition education to students. Further evidence is needed to understand how serious games, including Foodbot Factory, can be researched in schools to support nutrition education. The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of a research study protocol that implements the curriculum-based nutrition education intervention Foodbot Factory into a real-world classroom setting. The evaluation of the protocol included study processes, resources, and management feasibility outcomes, as well as a preliminary assessment of scientific outcomes relevant to the intervention. A nonrandomized study determined the feasibility of intervention implementation. Grade 4 and 4/5 classrooms were assigned to have nutrition education lessons for 5 days with either the Foodbot Factory or a control intervention. Outcomes were assessed in 4 feasibility domains of study processes (eg, recruitment and attrition rates), resources (eg, time taken to deliver the intervention), and management (eg, challenges with intervention delivery), and a preliminary assessment of scientific outcomes pertaining to the acceptability and impacts of the interventions. These outcomes were captured in semistructured field notes completed by study staff and a Nutrition Attitudes and Knowledge questionnaire and acceptability questionnaire completed by participants. Data were analyzed descriptively and using a paired t test to assess within-group changes in nutrition knowledge. In total, 4 classrooms participated in the feasibility study, with varying recruitment rates for schools (3/20, 15%), classrooms (4/4, 100%), parents (54/102, 53%), and children (49/54, 91%). The time required to implement the research protocol, including data collection and lesson plans, was sufficient and management of the intervention implementation was overall successful. Some challenges were experienced with classroom management during data collection, specifically with electronic data collection. After the intervention, participants reported a positive affective experience (26/41, 63%) and learning something new about healthy eating (31/41, 76%). Participants in both study groups improved their nutrition knowledge, but the changes were not statistically significant. The Foodbot Factory group had a statistically significant improvement in their knowledge of vegetables and fruit (P=.04) and protein foods (P=.03). These findings indicate that the study protocol is feasible to implement and evaluate Foodbot Factory in a representative sample with select modifications to improve recruitment and data collection procedures.

Background Food companies shape Canada’s food supply through voluntary actions and commitments concerning product (re)formulation; however, the extent that these initiatives translate into actual improvements in nutritional quality is unclear. This study examined changes in the nutritional quality of products offered by the top 22 packaged food and beverage companies in Canada from 2013 to 2017, in relation to the strength of their product (re) formulation actions and commitments. Methods The Food Company Reformulation (FCR) scoring tool was used to quantify the strength of companies’ reported recent actions and commitments to reduce energy and nutrients of concern in their products, with higher scores signifying stronger voluntary actions/commitments. Nutritional information for products was sourced from the University of Toronto FLIP 2013 ( n  = 6490) and 2017 ( n  = 8277) databases ( n  = 4074 matched products). Changes in product healthfulness were assessed using the Health Star Rating (HSR) system (with higher HSRs denoting healthier products) and calories, sodium, saturated fat, trans fat, and total and free sugar levels per 100 g/mL. Generalized estimating equations examined changes in nutritional quality in relation to FCR scores. Results Overall, mean HSRs increased significantly for 5 companies’ product portfolios and were reduced in 1 company’s product portfolio. There were significant reductions in calories, sodium, saturated fat in 2 companies’ portfolios and increases in 4, 3, and 8 companies’ portfolios, respectively. Trans fats increased significantly in 2 companies’ portfolios. Total and free sugars decreased significantly in 4 and 5 companies’ portfolios, respectively, and increased in 1 company’s portfolio. There was little change in the healthfulness of matched products. Higher FCR scores were not associated with greater increases in HSRs, or reductions in calories or nutrient amounts. FCR scores were negatively associated with HSRs and positively associated with total and free sugars. No relationship was observed between FCR scores and calories, sodium, saturated fat or trans fat. Conclusions Reporting stronger voluntary product (re) formulation actions and commitments was not associated with greater improvements in the healthfulness of products offered by Canada’s leading packaged food and beverage companies from 2013 to 2017, suggesting a need for stronger industry initiatives or mandatory government interventions to improve the healthfulness of the food supply.

Children increasingly use mobile apps. Strategies to increase child engagement with apps include the use of gamification and images that incite fun and interaction, such as food. However, the foods and beverages that children are exposed to while using apps are unknown and may vary by app type. The aim of this study is to identify the app content (ie, types of foods and beverages) included in nutrition-themed apps intended for children, to assess the use of game-like features, and to examine app characteristics such as overall quality and behavior change techniques (BCTs). This analysis used a cross-sectional database of nutrition-themed apps intended for children (≤12 years), collected between May 2018 and June 2019 from the Apple App Store and Google Play Store (n=259). Apps were classified into four types: food games or nongames that included didactic nutrition guides, habit trackers, and other. Food and beverages were identified in apps and classified into 16 food categories, as recommended (8/16, 50%) and as not recommended (8/16, 50%) by dietary guidelines, and quantified by app type. Binomial logistic regression assessed whether game apps were associated with foods and beverages not recommended by guidelines. App quality, overall and by subscales, was determined using the Mobile App Rating Scale. The BCT Taxonomy was used to classify the different behavioral techniques that were identified in a subsample of apps (124/259, 47.9%). A total of 259 apps displayed a median of 6 (IQR 3) foods and beverages. Moreover, 62.5% (162/259) of apps were classified as food games, 27.4% (71/259) as didactic nutrition guides, 6.6% (17/259) as habit trackers, and 3.5% (9/259) as other. Most apps (198/259, 76.4%) displayed at least one food or beverage that was not recommended by the dietary guidelines. Food game apps were almost 3 times more likely to display food and beverages not recommended by the guidelines compared with nongame apps (β=2.8; P<.001). The overall app quality was moderate, with a median Mobile App Rating Scale score of 3.6 (IQR 0.7). Functionality was the subscale with the highest score (median 4, IQR 0.3). Nutrition guides were more likely to be educational and contain informative content on healthy eating (score 3.7), compared with the other app types, although they also scored significantly lower in engagement (score 2.3). Most apps (105/124, 84.7%) displayed at least one BCT, with the most common BCT being information about health consequences. Findings suggest nutrition-themed apps intended for children displayed food and beverage content not recommended by dietary guidelines, with gaming apps more likely to display not recommended foods than their nongame counterparts. Many apps have a moderate app quality, and the use of consequences (instead of rewards) was the most common BCT.

ObjectiveTo characterise the literature on dietary sodium knowledge, attitudes and behaviours (KAB) among adults in the Americas.DesignA scoping review conducted between September 2023 and August 2024, with an updated search in March 2025.Data sourcesOvid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Web of Science Core Collection, ProQuest Dissertation & Theses Global, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, Scientific Electronic Library Online, and other grey literature sources.Inclusion criteriaStudies with adults (≥ 18 years) residing in the Americas that assessed sodium-KAB were included.Screening and data extractionTwo reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts. Data charting was conducted by one polyglot reviewer and validated by another.ResultsThirty-two studies were included, mostly from North America (n=17; USA=11), followed by South America (n=13; Argentina and Chile=4) and Central America and the Caribbean (n=7; Costa Rica=5). Only one US study monitored sodium KAB over time, and three assessed differences by intake level. Most used quantitative methods (n=26), convenience samples (n=22), and had predominantly female participants (n=20). Rural populations were interviewed in only two studies, and just one used questions that underwent content validity testing with published results. Knowledge assessments focused on health outcomes (72%), food sources (47%) and intake recommendations (44%). Attitudes centred on concern about intake (53%), perceived intake (41%) and intention to change (28%). Behaviours commonly assessed included actions to reduce intake (72%), use of added salt (53%) and food practices (50%).ConclusionsSignificant gaps exist in dietary sodium KAB monitoring across the Americas, particularly in lower-income countries with several under-represented populations. Future research should prioritise equity-focused surveillance using validated tools and behaviour change theories and frameworks to generate actionable data to advance public health policies and WHO sodium reduction targets.

Nutrient profiling (NP) models are useful tools for objectively and transparently quantifying the nutritional quality of packaged foods and beverages. Many NP models incorporate ingredients beneficial for health (e.g., fruits, vegetables, nuts, legumes (FVNL)) in addition to less healthful nutrients or components, assigning points based on the proportion of the product that contains FVNL ingredients. However, with food labelling in most countries lacking mandatory quantitative ingredient declarations (QUIDs), there is potential for the estimation of FVNL points to be ambiguous and inconsistent. The purpose of this article was to describe the development and application of methodology for estimating FVNL points for products without QUIDs, based on the position of FVNL components within the ingredients list. Using this method, FVNL points were calculated for packaged foods and beverages in the University of Toronto Food Label Information Program 2017 database (n = 17,337). Distributions of FVNL points were examined overall and by food category. This study provides evidence of the feasibility of this method in distinguishing between products with differing amounts of FVNL ingredients. This method will be valuable for researchers and policymakers in ensuring consistent, objective and reproducible estimations of FVNL points—and consequently, assessments of product healthfulness—for food supplies without QUIDs.

Background In 2010, nutrition claims were investigated in Canadian foods; however, many nutrition and other claims have been introduced since then. This study aimed to determine: i) the proportion of foods carrying claims in 2013, ii) the types and prevalence of nutrition claims (nutrient content claims, health claims, general health claims) and other claims displayed on labels in 2013, iii) and trends in use of nutrition claims between 2010 and 2013. Methods Repeated cross-sectional analysis of the University of Toronto Food Label Information Program (FLIP) of Canadian foods (2010/11 n  = 10,487; 2013 n  = 15,342). Regulated nutrition claims (nutrient content, health claims) were classified according to Canadian regulations. A decision tree was used to classify non-regulated general health claims (e.g., front-of-pack claims). Other claims (e.g., gluten-free) were also collected. Proportions of claims in 2013 were determined and χ 2 was used to test significant differences for different types of claims between 2010 and 2013. Results Overall, 49% of products in 2013 displayed any type of claim and 46% of foods in FLIP 2013 carried a nutrition claim (nutrient content claim, health claim, general health claim). Meal replacements and fruits/fruits juices were the categories with the largest proportion of foods with claims. At least one approved nutrient content claim was carried on 42.9% of products compared to 45.5% in 2010 ( p  < 0.001). Health claims, specifically disease risk reduction claims, were slightly lower in 2013 (1.5%) compared to 1.7% in 2010 ( p  = 0.225). General health claims, specifically front-of-pack claims, were carried on 20% of foods compared to 18.9% in 2010 ( p  = 0.020). Other claims, specifically gluten-free, were present on 7.3% of foods. Conclusions Nutrition and other claims were used on half of Canadian prepackaged foods in 2013. Many claims guidelines and regulations have been released since 2010; however, little impact has been seen in the prevalence of such claims in the food supply. Claims related to nutrients of public health priority, such as sugars and sodium, were not commonly used on food labels. Monitoring trends in the use of nutrition and other claims is essential to determine if their use on food labels reflects public health objectives, or instead are being used as marketing tools.

To examine the impact of front-of-package (FOP) labels on perceived healthfulness, purchasing intentions and understanding of common FOP systems. A parallel, open-label design randomised participants to different FOP labelling conditions: 'high in' warning labels (WL), multiple traffic light labelling (TLL), health star ratings (HSR) (all displayed per serving) or control with no interpretive FOP labelling. Participants completed a brief educational session via a smartphone application and two experimental tasks. In Task 1, participants viewed healthy or unhealthy versions of four products and rated healthiness and purchasing intention on a seven-point Likert-type scale. In Task 2, participants ranked three sets of five products from healthiest to least healthy. Online commercial panel. Canadian residents ≥ 18 years who were involved in household grocery shopping, owned a smartphone and met minimum screen requirements. Data from 1997 participants (n 500/condition) were analysed. Task 1: across most product categories, the TLL and HSR increased perceived healthiness of healthier products. All FOP systems decreased perceived healthiness of less healthy products. Similar, albeit dampened, effects were seen regarding purchasing intentions. Task 2: participants performed best in the HSR, followed by the TLL, WL and control conditions. Lower health literacy was associated with higher perceived healthiness and purchasing intentions and poorer ranking task performance across all conditions. All FOP labelling systems, after a brief educational session, improved task performance across a wide spectrum of foods. This effect differed depending on the nutritional quality of the products and the information communicated on labels.Trial Registration: NCT03290118.