Skip to main content

Table 2 Objective understanding of FOPL as measured by change in correct food product ranking before (without FOPL) and after randomization (with FOPL)

From: Bulgarian consumers’ objective understanding of front-of-package nutrition labels: a comparative, randomized study

Food category

N

Health Star Rating

Multiple Traffic Lights

Nutri-Score

Warning Label

OR (95% CI)

p

OR (95% CI)

p

OR (95% CI)

p

OR (95% CI)

p

All categories

1010

1.99 (1.32–3.00)

0.003

1.14 (0.76–1.70)

0.62

2.33 (1.55–3.51)

< 0.001

1.29 (0.86–1.93)

0.32

699a

2.31 (1.39–3.83)

0.002

1.16 (0.73–1.86)

0.53

2.46 (1.56–3.88)

< 0.001

1.24 (0.77–2.02)

0.51

Pizzas

957

1.77 (1.09–2.88)

0.05

0.98 (0.61–1.58)

0.93

2.37 (1.45–3.87)

0.003

1.36 (0.84–2.21)

0.32

Cakes

1000

3.04 (1.74–5.33)

< 0.001

1.57 (0.90–2.72)

0.20

2.90 (1.66–5.08)

0.003

1.67 (0.96–2.91)

0.14

Breakfast cereals

961

1.46 (0.78–2.75)

0.32

1.33 (0.71–2.50)

0.46

1.97 (1.06–3.66)

0.07

0.92 (0.48–1.73)

0.84

  1. Multivariable ordinal logistic regression (“Reference Intakes” = reference) with adjustment for sex, age, education, household income, children < 14 y living in household, grocery shopping responsibility, self-assessed diet quality, and knowledge about nutrition; all p-values corrected via false discovery rate to account for multiple comparisons
  2. CI confidence interval, FOPL front-of-package label, OR odds ratio
  3. aSensitivity analysis excluding 311 individuals who did not recall seeing FOPL on products