To describe the collaborative process between a grocery retailer and a panel of nutrition experts used to develop a nutrition guidance system (Guiding Stars) that evaluates the nutrient profile of all edible products in the supermarket, and to report the results of the food and beverage ratings.
Design.
A collaboration between a private retailer and members of the scientific community that led to the development of a scoring algorithm used to evaluate the nutritional quality of foods and beverages.
Setting/Subjects.
Northeast supermarkets (n = 160).
Measures.
Food and beverage nutrition ratings and distribution of stars across different grocery categories.
Analysis.
Descriptive statistics for rating distributions were computed. T-tests were conducted to assess differences in mean nutrient values between foods with zero versus three stars or a dichotomized variable representing all foods with one to three stars.
Results.
All edible grocery items (n = 27,466) were evaluated, with 23.6% earning at least one star. Items receiving at least one star had lower mean levels of sodium, saturated fat, and sugars and higher amounts of fiber than products not earning stars.
Conclusion.
The Guiding Stars system rates edible products without regard to brand or manufacturer, and provides consumers with a simple tool to quickly identify more nutritious choices while shopping. The low percentage of products qualifying for stars reflects poorly on the food choices available to Americans.
US Dept of Health and Human Services and US Dept of AgricultureDietary Guidelines for Americans, 2005.6th ed.Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office; 2005.
6.
JohnsonRKAppelLJBrandsM. Dietary sugars intake and cardiovascular health. A scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation.2009;120:1011–1020.
7.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Application of lower sodium intake recommendations to adults–United States, 1999–2006. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep.2009;58:281–283.
8.
US Dept of Health and Human Services and US Dept of Agriculture. Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2010. Available at: http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/DGAs2010-DGACReport.htm. Accessed December 1, 2010.
9.
Nutrition Labeling and Education Act of 1990, Pub L 101–535.
10.
Institute of Medicine. Dietary Reference Intakes: Guiding Principles for Nutrition Labeling and Fortification. Food and Nutrition Board. Washington, DC: National Academies of Sciences Press; 2003.
11.
JonesGRichardsonM. An objective examination of consumer perception of nutrition information based on healthiness ratings and eye movements. Public Health Nutr.2007;1:238–244.
12.
LevyASPattersonREKristalARLiSS. How well do consumers understand percentage from daily value on food labels?Am J Health Promot.2000; 14:157–160.
13.
HookerNHTeratanavatR. Dissecting qualified health claims: evidence from experimental studies. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr.2008;48:160–176.
14.
Hasler CM. Health claims in the United States: an aid to the public or a source of confusion?J Nutr.2008; 138:1216S–1220S.
15.
SatiaJAGalankoJANeuhouserML. Food nutrition label use is associated with demographic, behavioral, and psychosocial factors and dietary intake among African Americans in North Carolina. J Am Diet Assoc.2005;105:392–402.
16.
JamesDC. Factors influencing food choices, dietary intake, and nutrition-related attitudes among African Americans: application of a culturally sensitive model. Ethn Health.2004;9:349–367.
17.
KunkelDMcKinleyC. Developing ratings for food products: lessons learned from media rating systems. J Nutr Educ Behav.2007;39:S25–S31.
Azais-BraescoVGoffiCLabouzeE. Nutrient profiling: comparison and critical analysis of existing systems. Public Health Nutr.2006;9:613–622.
21.
Institute of MedicineDietary Reference Intakes: The Essential Guide to Nutrient Requirements. Food and Nutrition Board.Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2006.
22.
WHO/FAO. Diet, nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases. WHO Technical Report Series 916.Geneva, 2003.
23.
VerhagenHvan den BergH. A simple visual model to compare existing nutrient profiling schemes. Food Nutr Res.2008;52:10–15.
24.
21 CFR §101.9. Nutrition labeling of food (2007).
25.
21 CFR §101.9. Food labeling: trans fatty acids in nutrition labeling, nutrient content claims, and health claims (2003).
WillsJMSchmidtDBPillo-BlockaFCairnsG. Exploring global consumer attitudes toward nutrition information on food labels. Nutr Rev.2009;67:S102–S106.
28.
International Food Information Council Foundation. Impact of trans fat label information on consumer food choices.2003. Available at: http://www.ific.org/research/transres.cfm. Accessed June 15, 2009.
29.
IFIC12. International Food Information Council. Consumer attitudes toward functional foods/foods for health.2007. Available at: http://www.ific.org/research/funcfoodsres07.cfm. Accessed June 15, 2009.
SeymourJDYarochALSerduleM. Impact of nutrition environmental interventions on point-of-purchase behavior in adults: a review. Prev Med.2004;39:S108–S136.
32.
BrownsonRCHaire-JoshuDLukeDA. Shaping the context of health: a review of environmental and policy approaches in the prevention of chronic diseases. Annu Rev Public Health.2006;27:341–370.
33.
GlanzKYarochAL. Strategies for increasing fruit and vegetable intake in grocery stores and communities: policy, pricing, and environmental change. Prev Med.2004;39:S75–S80.
34.
GlanzKHewittAMRuddJ. Consumer behavior and nutrition education: an integrative review. J Nutr Educ.1992;24:267–277.
35.
KristalARGoldenharLMuldoonJMortonRF. Evaluation of a supermarket intervention to increase consumption of fruits and vegetables. Am J Health Promot.1997;11:422–425.
36.
RodgersABKesslerLGPortnoy. “Eat For Health”: a supermarket intervention for nutrition and cancer risk reduction. Am J Public Health.1994;84:72–76.
37.
FeunekesGIJGortemakerIAWillemsAA. Front-of-pack nutrition labelling: testing effectiveness of different nutrition labelling formats front-of-pack in four European countries. Appetite.2007;50:57–70.
38.
SutherlandLAKaleyLAFischerL. Guiding Stars: the effect of a nutrition navigation program on consumer purchases at the supermarket. Am J Clin Nutr.2010;91:1090S–1094S.
39.
van KleefEvan TrijpHPaepsFFernandez-CeleminL. Consumer preference for front-of-pack calories labelling. Public Health Nutr.2007;11:203–213.
40.
DrewnowskiA. What's next for nutrition labeling and health claims? An update on nutrient profiling in the European Union and the United States. Nutr Today.2007;42:206–214.
41.
NijmanCAJZijpIMSierksmaA. A method to improve the nutritional quality of foods and beverages based on dietary recommendations. Eur J Clin Nutr.2007;61:461–471.
42.
DrewnowskiA. Defining nutrient density: development and validation of the Nutrient Rich Foods Index. J Am Coll Nutr.2009;28:421S–426S.
43.
KatzDLNjikeVYFaridiZ. The stratification of foods on the basis of overall nutritional quality: the overall nutritional quality index. Am J Health Promot.2009;24:133–143.
