Objective: Proposed Australian regulation of claims on food labels includes requirements for products carrying a health claim to meet nutrient profiling criteria. This would not apply to nutrition content claims. The present study investigated the number and healthiness of products carrying claims and the impact of the proposed regulation. Design: Observational survey of claims on food packages across three categories: non-alcoholic beverages, breakfast cereals and cereal bars. Nutrient profiling was applied to products carrying claims to determine their eligibility to carry health claims under the proposed regulation. Setting: Three large metropolitan stores from the three major supermarket chains in Sydney, Australia were surveyed in August 2011. Subjects: All claims on 1028 products were recorded. Nutrition composition and ingredients were collected from the packaging, enabling nutrient profiling. The proportion of products in each category carrying claims and the proportion of these that did not meet the nutrient profiling criteria were calculated. Results: Two-thirds of products in the three categories (ranging from 18 to 78 %) carried at least one claim. Of those carrying health claims, 31 % did not meet the nutrient profiling criteria. These would be ineligible to carry these claims under the proposed regulation. Additionally, 29 % of products carrying nutrition content claims did not meet the nutrient profiling criteria. Conclusions: The number of products carrying nutrition content claims that did not meet the nutrient profiling criteria suggests that comprehensive regulation is warranted. Promotion of unhealthy foods using claims is potentially misleading for consumers and hinders their ability to select healthier foods. Implementation of the proposed regulation represents an improvement to current practice.

Background Although existing studies have described patterns of social media use in healthcare, most are focused on health professionals in one discipline. Population health requires a multi-disciplinary approach to ensure diversity and to include diverse stakeholders. To date, what is known about using social media in population health is focused on its potential as a communication tool. This study aims to investigate patterns of use and perceived value of social media usage among stakeholders in population health practice, policy, or research. Methods We conducted a web-based survey of delegates attending the Singapore Population Health Conversations and Workshop. We designed a 24-item questionnaire to assess 1) social media use in terms of type of platform and frequency of use; 2) perceptions of social media relevance and impact on population health; and 3) top three areas in population health that would benefit from social media. We used descriptive and logistic regression analyses to assess the relationships between variables. Results Of the 308 survey respondents, 97.7% reported that they use social media in some form. Messaging (96.8%) was the most dominant activity when using social media. Challenges in implementing social media for population health were time investment by health care professionals (56.2%) and patient adoption (52.9%). The top three population health areas that would benefit most from using social media were the promotion of healthy behaviors (60.7%), community engagement (47.7%), and preventive care (40.6%). Older respondents (> = 40 years) were less likely to view social media as useful for the promotion of healthy behaviors (OR = 0.34; 95% CI: 0.19–0.60). Non-social/healthcare professionals were more likely to consider social media to be useful for community engagement (OR = 1.74; 95% CI: 1.10–2.76). For preventive care, older respondents (OR = 0.51; 95% CI: 0.32–0.82) and non-social/healthcare professionals were less likely to view social media as useful (OR = 0.61; 95% CI: 0.38–0.97). Conclusions Our findings suggest that it may be important to select the specific care areas that would benefit most from using social media. The time investment needed by population health professionals should be fully addressed in planning to maximize the application and potential value of social media.

No abstract

BACKGROUND Social media has become a popular tool in many healthcare settings with healthcare professionals commonly using social media to connect and share information. However, existing literature has predominantly focused on professionals in a single clinical discipline. The nature of population health activity necessitates a multi-disciplinary approach and hence involves a diverse range of stakeholders. To date, little is known about the acceptability of the use of social media for population health among various population health stakeholders. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to investigate the patterns of use and perceived values of social media among health and social care providers and other stakeholders involved in population health practice, policy or research. METHODS We conducted a web-based cross-sectional survey in April 2019 at the national networking event for practitioners of population health in Singapore. We designed a questionnaire to assess 1) the social media use in terms of platform and frequency and 2) perceptions on the relevance and impact of social media on population health including benefits and limitations of social media use, target population health areas, target age groups and target audiences most likely to benefit from the use of social media. We used descriptive and logistic regression analyses to assess the relationships between variables. RESULTS Of the 308 respondents, the vast majority (97.7%) reported that they use social media. Messaging (96.8%) was the most frequently used mode of social media. In terms of age groups and recipients, participants perceived that 30-39 years (92.2%) and caregivers (87.3%) would benefit most from the use of social media. About three quarters agreed that social media sites or apps (77.0%) were the most useful modes of communication. The main challenges in scaling social media for population health included time investment by health care providers (56.2%) and patient adoption (53.0%). The top three areas in population health that would benefit most from the use of social media included the promotion of healthy behaviours (60.7%), community engagement (47.3%) and preventive care (40.6%). Older respondents (>= 40 years) were less likely to think that social media would be useful for the promotion of healthy behaviours (OR=0.44; 95% CI: 0.28-0.71). Non-social and healthcare providers were more likely to consider that social media would be useful for community engagement (OR= 1.66; 95% CI: 0.13-0.81). For preventive care, older respondents (OR= 0.51; 95% CI: 0.32-0.82) and non-health and social care providers were less likely to think that social media would be useful (OR= 0.61; 95% CI: 0.38-0.97). CONCLUSIONS This study provides valuable insight into the views of population health stakeholders on the use of social media for population health. Findings will be used to inform the design of population health programmes and interventions that employ social media.

No abstract