Altering the availability or proximity of food, alcohol, and tobacco products to change their selection and consumption

Hollands, Gareth J; Carter, Patrice; Anwer, Sumayya; King, Sarah; Jebb, Susan A.; Ogilvie, David; Shemilt, Ian; Higgins, Julian P T; Marteau, Theresa

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd012573.pub2

Cited by 51 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 185 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This means that there are very few ‘like for like’ options for people to make a switch from 75 cl bottles. In addition to increasing the availability of wine in 50 cl bottles, their placement in retail stores could also affect their likelihood of being purchased [31]. To increase their selection over 75 cl bottles, 50 cl bottles could be placed in areas associated with higher sales, including end‐of‐aisle displays and the middle of shelves [32–34].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of bottle size on in‐home consumption of wine: a randomized controlled cross‐over trial

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim To assess the impact of purchasing wine in 50 cl bottles compared with 75 cl bottles on the amount of wine consumed at home. Design Cross‐over randomized controlled trial with a ‘usual behaviour’ period of a maximum of 3 weeks between conditions. Setting Households in the United Kingdom. Participants One hundred and eighty‐six households that consumed between two and eight 75 cl bottles of wine each week. Intervention Households were randomized to the order in which they purchased wine in two bottle sizes. During two 14‐day intervention periods, households purchased a pre‐set volume of wine—based on their baseline self‐reported weekly consumption—in either 75 cl bottles or 50 cl bottles. On days 7 and 14 of each study period, participating households sent photographs of each purchased wine bottle. Measurements The primary outcome was the volume of study wine in millilitres (ml) consumed during each study period estimated through returned photographs. The secondary outcome was the rate of consumption measured by the mean number of days taken to drink 1.5 litres from each bottle size. Findings One hundred and sixty‐six of 186 enrolled households satisfactorily completed the study. After accounting for pre‐specified covariates, 191.1 ml [95% confidence interval (CI) = 42.03–339.2] or 4.5% (95% CI = 1.0–7.9%) more wine was consumed per 14‐day period from 75‐cl bottles than from 50‐cl bottles. Consumption was 5.8% faster (95% CI = –10.9 to –0.4%) from 75 cl bottles than from 50 cl bottles. Conclusions Consuming wine at home from 50 cl bottles, compared with 75 cl bottles, may reduce both amount consumed and rate of consumption.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of bottle size on in‐home consumption of wine: a randomized controlled cross‐over trial

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, studies in military cafeterias have altered availability but again alongside other interventions ( Bingham et al, 2012 ; Crombie et al, 2013 ), finding an impact on the healthiness of food selected but unable to isolate the independent effect of altering availability. A Cochrane review of availability interventions in all settings is currently underway ( Hollands, Carter, et al, 2017 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of increasing the proportion of healthier foods available on energy purchased in worksite cafeterias: A stepped wedge randomized controlled pilot trial

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing the proportion of healthier foods available could encourage healthier consumption, but evidence to date is limited in scope and quality. The current study aimed to: (a) examine the feasibility and acceptability of intervening to change product availability in worksite cafeterias; and (b) estimate the impact on energy purchased of increasing the proportion of healthier (i.e. lower energy) cooked meals, snacks, cold drinks and sandwiches. Six English worksite cafeterias increased the proportion of healthier foods available, aiming to keep the total number of options constant, in a stepped wedge randomized controlled pilot trial conducted between January and May 2017. The intervention was generally successfully implemented and acceptable to clientele. Generalized linear mixed models showed a reduction of 6.9% (95%CI: -11.7%, −1.7%, p = 0.044) in energy (kcal) purchased from targeted food categories across all sites. However, impact varied across sites, with energy purchased from targeted categories significantly reduced in two sites (−10.7% (95%CI: -18.1% to −2.6%, p = 0.046); −18.4% (95%CI: -26.9% to −8.8%, p = 0.013)), while no significant differences were seen in the other four sites. Overall, increasing the proportion of healthier options available in worksite cafeterias seems a promising intervention to reduce energy purchased but contextual effects merit further study.

show abstract

“…There are a variety of environmental cues that can be manipulated to shape diet-related behaviours ( Hollands et al., 2013 , Hollands et al., 2017a ), such as the distance at which food is positioned. Increasing the distance between food and people decreases the likelihood that they select and consume it (for reviews see Bucher et al., 2016 , Hollands et al., 2017b ; see also Baskin et al., 2016 , Kroese et al., 2015 , Musher-Eizenman et al., 2010 , Meyers and Stunkard, 1980 ; Levitz, 1976 ) and this has been observed across a range of foods including chocolate, desserts, savoury snacks and sliced fruits and vegetables. This “proximity effect” seems consistent regardless of craving ( Maas, de Ridder, de Vet, & de Wit, 2012 ) and food preferences ( Privitera & Zuraikat, 2014 ) and occurs even when increases of distance are relatively small e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of snack-food proximity on intake in general population samples with higher and lower cognitive resource

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivePlacing snack-food further away from people consistently decreases its consumption (“proximity effect”). However, given diet-related health inequalities, it is important to know whether interventions that alter food proximity have potential to change behaviour regardless of cognitive resource (capacity for self-control). This is often lower in those in lower socio-economic positions, who also tend to have less healthy diet-related behaviours. Study 1 aims to replicate the proximity effect in a general population sample and estimate whether trait-level cognitive resource moderates the effect. In a stronger test, Study 2 investigates whether the effect is similar regardless of manipulated state-level cognitive resource.MethodParticipants were recruited into two laboratory studies (Study 1: n = 159; Study 2: n = 246). A bowl of an unhealthy snack was positioned near (20 cm) or far (70 cm) from the participant, as randomised. In Study 2, participants were further randomised to a cognitive load intervention. The pre-specified primary outcome was the proportion of participants taking any of the snack.ResultsSignificantly fewer participants took the snack when far compared with near in Study 2 (57.7% vs 70.7%, β = −1.63, p = 0.020), but not in Study 1 (53.8% vs 63.3%, X2 = 1.12, p = 0.289). Removing participants who moved the bowl (i.e. who did not adhere to protocol), increased the effect-sizes: Study 1: 39.3% vs 63.9%, X2 = 6.43, p = 0.011; Study 2: 56.0% vs 73.9%, β = -2.46, p = 0.003. Effects were not moderated by cognitive resource.ConclusionsThese studies provide the most robust evidence to date that placing food further away reduces likelihood of consumption in general population samples, an effect unlikely to be moderated by cognitive resource. This indicates potential for interventions altering food proximity to contribute to addressing health inequalities, but requires testing in real-world settings.Trial registrationBoth studies were registered with ISRCTN (Study 1 reference no.: ISRCTN46995850, Study 2 reference no.: ISRCTN14239872).

show abstract

Altering the availability or proximity of food, alcohol, and tobacco products to change their selection and consumption

Cited by 51 publications

References 185 publications

Impact of bottle size on in‐home consumption of wine: a randomized controlled cross‐over trial

Impact of bottle size on in‐home consumption of wine: a randomized controlled cross‐over trial

Impact of increasing the proportion of healthier foods available on energy purchased in worksite cafeterias: A stepped wedge randomized controlled pilot trial

Effect of snack-food proximity on intake in general population samples with higher and lower cognitive resource

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About