Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Systematic Reviews
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Protocol

Barriers and facilitators to implementation of menu labelling interventions to support healthy food choices: a mixed methods systematic review protocol

Authors: Claire Kerins, Jennifer McSharry, Catherine Hayes, Ivan J. Perry, Fiona Geaney, Colette Kelly

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Menu labelling is continuing to gather public and legislative support as one of the potential environmental strategies for addressing the obesity pandemic. However, issues relating to implementation have been reported in countries where menu labelling has been introduced on a voluntary or mandatory basis. The aim of this mixed methods systematic review is to synthesise the empirical evidence on the barriers and facilitators to implementation of menu labelling interventions to support healthy food choices.

Methods

This review will use the ‘best fit’ framework synthesis approach to synthesise qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods evidence. Peer-reviewed publications will be accessed through PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Scopus. Grey literature will be accessed through Google Scholar, OpenGrey, RIAN, EThOS, ProQuest, WorldCat, Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations, Open Access Theses and Dissertations, and public health organisation websites. Screening reference lists, citation chaining and contacting authors of all included studies will be undertaken. There will be no restriction on menu labelling scheme or format, publication year or language; however, only primary research studies relevant to supply-side stakeholders will be eligible for inclusion. Study quality will be assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. At least two independent reviewers will perform study selection, data extraction and quality appraisal; if consensus is required, another independent reviewer will be consulted. A combination of deductive coding, using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research as the a priori framework, and inductive analysis, using secondary thematic analysis, will be used. The overall process will assist in the construction of a new evidence-based conceptual model regarding the implementation of menu labelling interventions. The new model will be assessed for bias and a sensitivity analysis performed.

Discussion

Given the growing consensus that a systemic, sustained portfolio of obesity prevention strategies, delivered at scale, is needed to address the obesity epidemic, greater understanding of the practical issues relating to implementation of such strategies is required. Findings from this review will be used to develop a set of best-practice guidelines to enhance the adoption, implementation and sustainability of menu labelling interventions across countries worldwide.

Systematic review registration

Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Roberto CA, Swinburn B, Hawkes C, Huang TT, Costa SA, Ashe M, et al. Patchy progress on obesity prevention: emerging examples, entrenched barriers, and new thinking. Lancet. 2015;385:2400–9.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Arno A, Thomas S. The efficacy of nudge theory strategies in influencing adult dietary behaviour: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:676.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI). Calories on menus in Ireland—report on a national consultation. Dublin: FSAI; 2012.
10.
Health Service Executive (HSE). Guidance for calorie posting implementation. Dublin: HSE; 2015.
11.
Vanderlee L, Hammond D. Does nutrition information on menus impact food choice? Comparisons across two hospital cafeterias. Public Health Nutr. 2014;17:1393–402.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Vyth EL, Steenhuis IH, Heymans MW, Roodenburg AJ, Brug J, Seidell JC. Influence of placement of a nutrition logo on cafeteria menu items on lunchtime food choices at Dutch work sites. J Am Diet Assoc. 2011;111:131–6.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Chu C, Breucker G, Harris N, Stitzel A, Gan X, Gu X, et al. Health-promoting workplaces—international settings development. Health Promot Int. 2000;15:155–67.CrossRef
14.
World Health Organization (WHO). Global action plan for the prevention and control of noncommunicable diseases 2013-2020. Geneva: WHO; 2013.
15.
16.
Nago ES, Lachat CK, Dossa RAM, Kolsteren PW. Association of out-of-home eating with anthropometric changes: a systematic review of prospective studies. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2014;54:1103–16.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Mah CL, Vanderlinden L, Mamatis D, Ansara DL, Levy J, Swimmer L. Ready for policy? Stakeholder attitudes toward menu labelling in Toronto, Canada. Can J Public Health. 2013;104:e229–34.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Roberto CA, Schwartz MB, Brownell KD. Rationale and evidence for menu-labeling legislation. Am J Prev Med. 2009;37:546–51.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Irish Universities Nutrition Alliance (IUNA). National Adult Nutrition Survey 2011. Cork: IUNA; 2011.
20.
Fryer C, Ervin RB. Caloric intake from fast food among adults: United States, 2007-2010. NCHS data brief; 2013. p. 1–8.
21.
Lassen AD, Thorsen AV, Sommer HM, Fagt S, Trolle E, Biltoft-Jensen A, et al. Improving the diet of employees at blue-collar worksites: results from the ‘Food at Work’intervention study. Public Health Nutr. 2011;14:965–74.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Orfanos P, Naska A, Trichopoulou A, Grioni S, Boer JM, van Bakel MM, et al. Eating out of home: energy, macro- and micronutrient intakes in 10 European countries. The European prospective investigation into cancer and nutrition. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2009;63(Suppl 4):S239–62.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Lachat C, Nago E, Verstraeten R, Roberfroid D, Van Camp J, Kolsteren P. Eating out of home and its association with dietary intake: a systematic review of the evidence. Obes Rev. 2012;13:329–46.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Bezerra IN, Curioni C, Sichieri R. Association between eating out of home and body weight. Nutr Rev. 2012;70:65–79.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Block JP, Condon SK, Kleinman K, Mullen J, Linakis S, Rifas-Shiman S, et al. Consumers’ estimation of calorie content at fast food restaurants: cross sectional observational study. BMJ. 2013;346:f2907.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
Chandon P, Wansink B. Is obesity caused by calorie underestimation? A psychophysical model of meal size estimation. J Mark Res. 2007;44:84–99.CrossRef
27.
Littlewood JA, Lourenço S, Iversen CL, Hansen GL. Menu labelling is effective in reducing energy ordered and consumed: a systematic review and meta-analysis of recent studies. Public Health Nutr. 2016;19:2106–21.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Fernandes AC, Oliveira RC, Proenca RPC, Curioni CC, Rodrigues VM, Fiates GMR. Influence of menu labeling on food choices in real-life settings: a systematic review. Nutr Rev. 2016;74:534–48.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Bleich SN, Economos CD, Spiker ML, Vercammen KA, VanEpps EM, Block JP, et al. A systematic review of calorie labeling and modified calorie labeling interventions: impact on consumer and restaurant behavior. Obesity. 2017;25:2018.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
Crockett RA, King SE, Marteau TM, Prevost AT, Bignardi G, Roberts NW, et al. Nutritional labelling for healthier food or non-alcoholic drink purchasing and consumption. Cochrane Libr. 2018;2:CD009315.
31.
Restrepo BJ. Calorie labeling in chain restaurants and body weight: evidence from New York. Health Econ. 2017;26:1191–209.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Bruemmer B, Krieger J, Saelens BE, Chan N. Energy, saturated fat, and sodium were lower in entrées at chain restaurants at 18 months compared with 6 months following the implementation of mandatory menu labeling regulation in King County, Washington. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2012;112:1169–76.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Bleich SN, Wolfson JA, Jarlenski MP. Calorie changes in large chain restaurants from 2008 to 2015. Prev Med. 2017;100:112–6.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Haynos AF, Roberto CA. The effects of restaurant menu calorie labeling on hypothetical meal choices of females with disordered eating. Int J Eat Disord. 2017;50:275–83.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
35.
Lillico HG, Hanning R, Findlay S, Hammond D. The effects of calorie labels on those at high-risk of eating pathologies: a pre-post intervention study in a university cafeteria. Public Health. 2015;129:732–9.CrossRefPubMed
36.
37.
Geaney F, Kelly C, Scotto Di Marrazzo J, Gilgan LA, McCarthy MA, Perry IJ. Evaluation of the uptake of voluntary calorie posting on menus in Ireland. Department of health; 2015.
38.
Thomas E. Food for thought: obstacles to menu labelling in restaurants and cafeterias. Public Health Nutr. 2015;19:2185–9.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Eyler AA, Nguyen L, Kong J, Yan Y, Brownson R. Patterns and predictors of enactment of state childhood obesity legislation in the United States: 2006–2009. Am J Public Health. 2012;102:2294–302.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
40.
Morestin F, Hogue MC, Jacques M, Benoit F. Public policies on nutrition labelling: effects and implementation issues: knowledge synthesis. National collaborating centre for healthy public policy; 2011.
41.
McGuffin LE, Wallace JMW, McCrorie TA, Price RK, Pourshahidi LK, Livingstone MBE. Family eating out-of-home: a review of nutrition and health policies. Proc Nutr Soc. 2013;72:126–39.CrossRefPubMed
42.
43.
Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4:1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
44.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000097.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
45.
Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4:50.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
46.
Haddaway NR, Collins AM, Coughlin D, Kirk S. The role of google scholar in evidence reviews and its applicability to grey literature searching. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0138237.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
47.
Bramer WM, Rethlefsen ML, Kleijnen J, Franco OH. Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic reviews: a prospective exploratory study. Syst Rev. 2017;6:245.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
48.
49.
Noyes J, Lewin S. Chapter 5: extracting qualitative evidence. In: Noyes J, Booth A, Hannes K, Harden A, Harris J, Lewin S, et al., editors. Supplementary guidance for inclusion of qualitative research in cochrane systematic reviews of interventions: Cochrane Collaboration Qualitative Methods Group; 2011. http://​cqrmg.​cochrane.​org/​supplemental-handbook-guidance.
50.
Booth A, Sutton A, Papaioannou D. Systematic approaches to a successful literature review. London: Sage; 2016.
51.
Boland A, Cherry G, Dickson R. Doing a systematic review: a student’s guide. London: Sage; 2017.
52.
Pluye P, Gagnon M-P, Griffiths F, Johnson-Lafleur J. A scoring system for appraising mixed methods research, and concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies in mixed studies reviews. Int J Nurs Stud. 2009;46:529–46.CrossRefPubMed
53.
Pace R, Pluye P, Bartlett G, Macaulay AC, Salsberg J, Jagosh J, et al. Testing the reliability and efficiency of the pilot Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) for systematic mixed studies review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2012;49:47–53.CrossRefPubMed
54.
Souto RQ, Khanassov V, Hong QN, Bush PL, Vedel I, Pluye P. Systematic mixed studies reviews: updating results on the reliability and efficiency of the mixed methods appraisal tool. Int J Nurs Stud. 2015;52:500–1.CrossRefPubMed
55.
Pluye P. Mixed kinds of evidence: synthesis designs and critical appraisal for systematic mixed studies reviews including qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies. Evid Based Med. 2015;20:79.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
56.
Daly J, Willis K, Small R, Green J, Welch N, Kealy M, et al. A hierarchy of evidence for assessing qualitative health research. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60:43–9.CrossRefPubMed
57.
58.
59.
Booth A, Carroll C, Ilott I, Low LL, Cooper K. Desperately seeking dissonance: identifying the disconfirming case in qualitative evidence synthesis. Qual Health Res. 2013;23:126–41.CrossRefPubMed
60.
Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). The Joanna Briggs Institute reviewers’ manual: methodology for JBI mixed methods systematic reviews. Adelaide: JBI; 2014.
61.
McLeroy KR, Garney W, Mayo-Wilson E, Grant S. Scientific reporting: raising the standards. Health Educ Behav. 2016;43:501–8.CrossRefPubMed
62.
Reid EK, Tejani AM, Huan LN, Egan G, O’Sullivan C, Mayhew AD, et al. Managing the incidence of selective reporting bias: a survey of Cochrane review groups. Syst Rev. 2015;4:85.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Barriers and facilitators to implementation of menu labelling interventions to support healthy food choices: a mixed methods systematic review protocol
Authors
Claire Kerins
Jennifer McSharry
Catherine Hayes
Ivan J. Perry
Fiona Geaney
Colette Kelly
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-018-0752-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Systematic Reviews 1/2018 Go to the issue

Research

Survival estimates stratified by the Nottingham Prognostic Index for early breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Research

Stakeholder involvement in systematic reviews: a scoping review

Protocol

The relationship between a trusted adult and adolescent outcomes: a protocol of a scoping review

Research

A systematic review: efficacy of botulinum toxin in walking and quality of life in post-stroke lower limb spasticity

Research

The potential of computerised analysis of bowel sounds for diagnosis of gastrointestinal conditions: a systematic review

Research

CYP genetic variants and toxicity related to anti-tubercular agents: a systematic review and meta-analysis