Richard Shepherd’s research while affiliated with University of Surrey and other places

BACKGROUND Most food in the United Kingdom is purchased in supermarkets, and many of these purchases are routinely tracked through supermarket loyalty card data. Using such data may be an effective way to develop remote public health interventions and to measure objectively their effectiveness at changing food purchasing behavior. OBJECTIVE The Front-of-pack food Labels: Impact on Consumer Choice (FLICC) study is a pilot randomized controlled trial of a digital behavior change intervention. This pilot trial aimed to collect data on recruitment and retention rates and to provide estimates of effect sizes for the primary outcome (healthiness of ready meals and pizzas purchased) to inform a larger trial. METHODS The intervention consisted of a website where participants could access tailored feedback on previous purchases of ready meals and pizzas, set goals for behavior change, and model and practice the recommended healthy shopping behavior using traffic light labels. The control consisted of Web-based information on traffic light labeling. Participants were recruited via email from a list of loyalty card holders held by the participating supermarket. All food and drink purchases for the participants for the 6 months before recruitment, during the 6-week intervention period, and during a 12-week washout period were transferred to the research team by the participating supermarket. Healthiness of ready meals and pizzas was measured using a predeveloped scale based solely on the traffic light colors on the foods. Questionnaires were completed at recruitment, end of the intervention, and end of washout to estimate the effect of the intervention on variables that mediate behavior change (eg, belief and intention formation). RESULTS We recruited 496 participants from an initial email to 50,000 people. Only 3 people withdrew from the study, and purchase data were received for all other participants. A total of 208 participants completed all 3 questionnaires. There was no difference in the healthiness of purchased ready meals and pizzas between the intervention and control arms either during the intervention period (P=.32) or at washout (P=.59). CONCLUSIONS Although the FLICC study did not find evidence of an impact of the intervention on food purchasing behavior, the unique methods used in this pilot trial are informative for future studies that plan to use supermarket loyalty card data in collaboration with supermarket partners. The experience of the trial showcases the possibilities and challenges associated with the use of loyalty card data in public health research. CLINICALTRIAL ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN19316955; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN19316955 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/76IVZ9WjK)

Background Most food in the United Kingdom is purchased in supermarkets, and many of these purchases are routinely tracked through supermarket loyalty card data. Using such data may be an effective way to develop remote public health interventions and to measure objectively their effectiveness at changing food purchasing behavior. Objective The Front-of-pack food Labels: Impact on Consumer Choice (FLICC) study is a pilot randomized controlled trial of a digital behavior change intervention. This pilot trial aimed to collect data on recruitment and retention rates and to provide estimates of effect sizes for the primary outcome (healthiness of ready meals and pizzas purchased) to inform a larger trial. Methods The intervention consisted of a website where participants could access tailored feedback on previous purchases of ready meals and pizzas, set goals for behavior change, and model and practice the recommended healthy shopping behavior using traffic light labels. The control consisted of Web-based information on traffic light labeling. Participants were recruited via email from a list of loyalty card holders held by the participating supermarket. All food and drink purchases for the participants for the 6 months before recruitment, during the 6-week intervention period, and during a 12-week washout period were transferred to the research team by the participating supermarket. Healthiness of ready meals and pizzas was measured using a predeveloped scale based solely on the traffic light colors on the foods. Questionnaires were completed at recruitment, end of the intervention, and end of washout to estimate the effect of the intervention on variables that mediate behavior change (eg, belief and intention formation). Results We recruited 496 participants from an initial email to 50,000 people. Only 3 people withdrew from the study, and purchase data were received for all other participants. A total of 208 participants completed all 3 questionnaires. There was no difference in the healthiness of purchased ready meals and pizzas between the intervention and control arms either during the intervention period (P=.32) or at washout (P=.59). Conclusions Although the FLICC study did not find evidence of an impact of the intervention on food purchasing behavior, the unique methods used in this pilot trial are informative for future studies that plan to use supermarket loyalty card data in collaboration with supermarket partners. The experience of the trial showcases the possibilities and challenges associated with the use of loyalty card data in public health research. Trial Registration ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN19316955; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN19316955 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/76IVZ9WjK) International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) RR2-10.1186/s40814-015-0015-1

Traffic light labelling of foods—a system that incorporates a colour-coded assessment of the level of total fat, saturated fat, sugar and salt on the front of packaged foods—has been recommended by the UK Government and is currently in use or being phased in by many UK manufacturers and retailers. This paper describes a protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial of an intervention designed to increase the use of traffic light labelling during real-life food purchase decisions. The objectives of this two-arm randomised controlled pilot trial are to assess recruitment, retention and data completion rates, to generate potential effect size estimates to inform sample size calculations for the main trial and to assess the feasibility of conducting such a trial. Participants will be recruited by email from a loyalty card database of a UK supermarket chain. Eligible participants will be over 18 and regular shoppers who frequently purchase ready meals or pizzas. The intervention is informed by a review of previous interventions encouraging the use of nutrition labelling and the broader behaviour change literature. It is designed to impact on mechanisms affecting belief and behavioural intention formation as well as those associated with planning and goal setting and the adoption and maintenance of the behaviour of interest, namely traffic light label use during purchases of ready meals and pizzas. Data will be collected using electronic sales data via supermarket loyalty cards and web-based questionnaires and will be used to estimate the effect of the intervention on the nutrition profile of purchased ready meals and pizzas and the behavioural mechanisms associated with label use. Data collection will take place over 48 weeks. A process evaluation including semi-structured interviews and web analytics will be conducted to assess feasibility of a full trial. The design of the pilot trial allows for efficient recruitment and data collection. The intervention could be generalised to a wider population if shown to be feasible in the main trial. Trial registration ISRCTN: ISRCTN19316955

Different front-of-pack (FOP) labelling systems have been developed in Europe by industry and organisations concerned with health promotion. A study ( n 2068) was performed to establish the extent to which inclusion of the most prevalent FOP systems – guideline daily amounts (GDA), traffic lights (TL), GDA+TL hybrid (HYB) and health logos (HL) – impact consumer perceptions of healthiness over and above the provision of a FOP basic label (BL) containing numerical nutritional information alone. The design included within- and between-subjects factors. The within-subjects factors were: food (pizzas, yogurts and biscuits), healthiness of the food (high health, medium health and low health) and the repeated measurements under BL and test FOP label conditions. The between-subjects factors were: the system (GDA, TL, GDA+TL hybrid, HL), portion size (typical portion size and a 50 % reduction of a typical portion) and country (the UK, Germany, Poland and Turkey). Although the FOP systems tested did result in small improvements for objective understanding under some conditions, there was little difference between the provision of an FOP label containing basic numerical nutritional information alone or between the various systems. Thus, any structured and legible presentation of key nutrient and energy information on the FOP label is sufficient to enable consumers to detect a healthier alternative within a food category when provided with foods that have distinctly different levels of healthiness. Future research should focus on developing greater understanding of the psychological and contextual factors that impact motivation and the opportunity to use the various FOP systems in real-world shopping settings.

A key step toward developing appropriate evidence-based public health nutrition policies is determining exactly how that evidence should be collected and assessed. Despite this the extent to which different evidence bases influence policy selection is rarely explored. This article presents an epistemological framework which offers a range of considerations affecting this process generally and with particular implications for both micronutrient requirements and the role of behavior in the policy-making process. Qualitative case study data covering 6 European countries/regions (Czech Republic, Italy, the Netherlands, Nordic countries, Poland, and Spain), and three micronutrients (folate, iodine, and vitamin D), have been presented to illustrate the relevance of the Framework.

Background/objectives: To investigate acceptability and tolerability of diets of different protein and glycemic index (GI) content aimed at weight maintenance following a phase of rapid weight loss, as part of a large pan-European dietary intervention trial. Subjects/methods: The Diogenes study (www.diogenes-eu.org) consisted of an initial 8-week rapid weight-loss phase (800-1000 kcal/day), followed by a 6-month weight maintenance intervention with five different diets varying in protein and GI content. Measurement of a range of outcomes relating to experience of the Diogenes diets in terms of acceptability, experience and mood were recorded via end of day questionnaires throughout the study. Results: Weight change during the initial weight loss phase weakly, but positively correlated with acceptability of the programme (r range=-0.08 to 0.2, P 0.05, n=685 on four of five dimensions). Success at weight maintenance positively correlated with acceptance of the programme (r range=-0.21 to -0.34, P<0.001, n=540 for all five dimensions). The diets with higher protein content were more acceptable than the low protein (LP) diets, however, no differences between the high vs low GI diets were found concerning acceptability and tolerability. Conclusions: Results suggest that moderately high protein diets, compared with LP diets, are more acceptable diets for weight control in overweight individuals.

Scientific advisory committees (SACs) are seen as "boundary organisations" working at the interface between science, policy and society. Although their narrowly defined remit of risk assessment is anchored in notions of rationality, objectivity, and reason, in reality, their sources for developing recommendations are not limited to scientific evidence. There is a growing expectation to involve non-scientific sources of information in the formation of knowledge, including the expectation of stakeholder consultation in forming recommendations. Such a move towards "democratisation" of scientific processes of decision-making within SACs has been described and often studied as "post-normal science" (PNS) (Funtowicz & Ravetz, 1993). In the current paper we examine the application of PNS in practice through a study of stakeholder consultations within the workings of the UK Scientific Advisory Committee for Nutrition (SACN). We use the theoretical insights from PNS-related studies to structure the analysis and examine the way in which PNS tenets resonate with the practices of SACN. We have selected a particular case of the SACN UK recommendations for salt as it is characterized by scientific controversy, uncertainty, vested interests and value conflict. We apply the tenets of PNS through documentary analysis of the SACN Salt Subgroup (SSG) consultation documents published in 2002/2003: the minutes of the 5 SACN SSG's meetings which included summary of the SACN SSG's stakeholder consultation and the SSG's responses to the consultation. The analysis suggests that the SACN consultation can be construed as a process of managing sources of risk to its organisation. Thus, rather than being an evidence of post-normal scientific practice, engagement became a mechanism for confirming the specific framing of science that is resonant with technocratic models of science holding authority over the facts. The implications for PNS theory are discussed.

Background: Research has suggested that patients and treatment providers hold different beliefs and models of obesity. This could impact upon the consistency and quality of interventions for weight management. The present study investigated the attitudes and beliefs of health professionals, commercial weight management advisors (expert patients) and overweight and obese dieters, towards obesity. Methods: Data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire from 287 health professionals, 85 expert patients and 116 dieters. Respondents gave their views on obesity causation and consequences, and the most efficacious means to manage obesity. Demographic data and self-reported height and weight were also collected. Factor analysis, analysis of variance and t-tests were used to analyse the data. Results: Health professionals, expert patients and dieters held similar models of obesity, identifying the same causes (lifestyle causes), consequences (medical consequences) and treatments (current recommended options) of obesity/overweight. Conclusions: The findings of the present study indicate a broader similarity between beliefs and attitudes of those involved in obesity treatment and those that they aim to treat than was previously assumed. The concordance of beliefs between patients and treatment providers is an encouraging finding and may have important implications for public health strategies in this area.

This paper shows how economic and psychological approaches to explaining why people overeat are based on different basic assumptions about human behaviour. Three such views of human behaviour are distinguished: rational behaviour, reasoned behaviour, and automatic behaviour. Economic approaches, trying to explain behaviour leading to weight gain and obesity based on the assumption of rational utility-maximising behaviour, are contrasted with psychological approaches built on the softer assumption of reasoned behaviour and the more drastic assumption that major parts of especially eating behaviour are subject to automatic reactions to environmental stimuli. It is concluded that only the three approaches taken together can give sufficient insight into the various mechanisms determining food intake and physical activity, and that such a broad view is necessary for understanding the ways in which commonly advocated policy instruments can affect energy-related behaviour.

In order to increase the consumption of wholegrain products or grain products with functional properties, it is important to understand consumer beliefs about such products and the impact of health claims. In a series of consumer studies several differences were found between countries. While consumers in Finland, Italy and the UK saw wholegrain products as having positive attributes, those in Finland had more negative beliefs about refined grain products. Health claims and wholegrain labels increased perceived healthiness but had a less positive impact on likelihood of buying, and in Italy both health claims and wholegrain labels even decreased the likelihood of buying.