Dataset Information

Sodium menu labelling: priorities for research and policy.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

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.

Design

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.

Setting

Local and state jurisdictions in the USA.

Participants

Not applicable.

Results

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.

Conclusion

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.

SUBMITTER: Alexander E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10195557 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Sodium menu labelling: priorities for research and policy.

Alexander Eleanore E Rutkow Lainie L Gudzune Kimberly A KA Cohen Joanna E JE McGinty Emma E EE

Public health nutrition 20201009 6

<h4>Objective</h4>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.<h4>Design</h4>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 ...[more]

PMID: 33032669

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCommunicating research to policymakers is a complex and difficult process. Ensuring that communication materials have information or design aspects that appeal to groups of policymakers with different priorities could be a substantive improvement over current dissemination approaches. To facilitate a more nuanced design of policy communication materials and message framing, we identified and characterized groups of state legislators based on how they prioritize different characteristics of research.MethodsWe used deidentified data collected in 2012 on 862 state legislators belonging to the US liberal-moderate-conservative ideological spectrum and from all 50 US states. Legislators were grouped using latent class analysis based on how they prioritized 12 different characteristics of research (e.g., research is unbiased, presents data on cost-effectiveness, policy options are feasible). We fit initial models using 1-6 group solutions and chose the final model based on identification, information criteria, and substantive interpretation.ResultsMost legislators placed a high priority on research that was understandable (61%), unbiased (61%), available at the time that decisions are made (58%), and brief and concise (55%). The best model identified four groups of state legislators. Pragmatic consumers (36%) prioritized research that was brief and concise, provided cost-effectiveness analyses, and was understandably written. Uninterested skeptics (30%) generally did not place a high priority on any of the research characteristics. Conversely, one-quarter of legislators (25%) belonged to the Highly Informed Supporters group that placed a high priority on most characteristics of research. Finally, Constituent-Oriented Decision Makers (9%) prioritized research that was relevant to their constituents, delivered by someone they knew or trusted, available at the time decisions were made, and dealt with an issue that they felt was a priority for state legislative action.ConclusionsTo maximize the impact of dissemination efforts, researchers should consider how to communicate with legislators who have distinct preferences, values, and priorities. The groups identified in this study could be used to develop communication materials that appeal to a wide range of legislators with distinct needs and preferences, potentially improving the uptake of research into the policymaking process. Future work should investigate how to engage skeptical legislators.

Project description:Policy Points The 2018 Declaration of Astana reemphasized the importance of primary health care and its role in achieving universal health coverage. While there is a large amount of literature on the economic aspects of delivering primary care services, there is a need for more comprehensive overviews of this evidence. In this article, we offer such an overview. Evidence suggests that there are several strategies involving coverage, financing, service delivery, and governance arrangements which can, if implemented, have positive economic impacts on the delivery of primary care services. These include arrangements such as worker task-shifting and telemedicine. The implementation of any such arrangements, based on positive economic evidence, should carefully account for potential impacts on overall health care access and quality. There are many opportunities for further research, with notable gaps in evidence on the impacts of increasing primary care funding or the overall supply of primary care services.ContextThe 2018 Declaration of Astana reemphasized the importance of primary health care and its role in achieving universal health coverage. To strengthen primary health care, policymakers need guidance on how to allocate resources in a manner that maximizes its economic benefits.MethodsWe collated and synthesized published systematic reviews of evidence on the economic aspects of different models of delivering primary care services. Building on previous efforts, we adapted existing taxonomies of primary care components to classify our results according to four categories: coverage, financing, service delivery, and governance.FindingsWe identified and classified 109 reviews that met our inclusion criteria according to our taxonomy of primary care components: coverage, financing, service delivery, and governance arrangements. A significant body of evidence suggests that several specific primary care arrangements, such as health workers' task shifting and telemedicine, can have positive economic impacts (such as lower overall health care costs). Notably absent were reviews on the impact of increasing primary care funding or the overall supply of primary care services.ConclusionsThere is a great opportunity for further research to systematically examine the broader economic impacts of investing in primary care services. Despite progress over the last decade, significant evidence gaps on the economic implications of different models of primary care services remain, which could help inform the basis of future research efforts.

Project description:BackgroundThere is an established body of evidence linking systems of social protection to health systems and health outcomes. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provide further emphasis on this linkage as necessary to achieving health and non-health goals. Existing literature on social protection and health has focused primarily on cash transfers. We sought to identify potential research priorities concerning social protection and health in low and middle-income countries, from multiple perspectives.MethodsPriority research questions were identified through two sources: 1) research reviews on social protection interventions and health, 2) interviews with 54 policy makers from Ministries of Health, multi-lateral or bilateral organizations, and NGOs. Data was collated and summarized using a framework analysis approach. The final refining and ranking of the questions was completed by researchers from around the globe through an online platform.ResultsThe overview of reviews identified 5 main categories of social protection interventions: cash transfers; financial incentives and other demand side financing interventions; food aid and nutritional interventions; parental leave; and livelihood/social welfare interventions. Policy-makers focused on the implementation and practice of social protection and health, how social protection programs could be integrated with other sectors, and how they should be monitored/evaluated. A collated list resulted in 31 priority research questions. Scale and sustainability of social protection programs ranked highest. The top 10 research questions focused heavily on design, implementation, and context, with a range of interventions that included cash transfers, social insurance, and labor market interventions.ConclusionsThere is potentially a rich field of enquiry into the linkages between health systems and social protection programs, but research within this field has focused on a few relatively narrowly defined areas. The SDGs provide an impetus to the expansion of research of this nature, with priority setting exercises such as this helping to align funder investment with researcher effort and policy-maker evidence needs.

Dataset Information

Sodium menu labelling: priorities for research and policy.

Objective

Design

Setting

Participants

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Sodium menu labelling: priorities for research and policy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets