2018
DOI: 10.1002/hpja.196
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

You wouldn't eat 16 teaspoons of sugar—so why drink it? Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander responses to the LiveLighter sugary drink campaign

Abstract: Results suggest the Aboriginal advertisement resonated with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and impacted knowledge about the sugar content of SSBs, particularly in Victoria where the campaign originated. SO WHAT?: This study highlights the importance of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander-led health promotion campaigns and tailoring health messages to the local Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander community.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
34
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
1
34
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These 78 studies have been summarised in online supplementary table 2 and grouped according to the policy areas of the NOURISHING framework (table 1). There were 5 articles examining food labelling, [18][19][20][21][22] 21 relating to healthy food provision (predominantly in schools), 10 reporting economic interventions (predominantly subsidies/discounts), [44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53] 10 evaluating food composition strategies (mainly food fortification), [54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63] 10 food retail studies, 64-73 6 food system/supply chain interventions, [54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62] 4 information/public awareness campaigns, [74][75][76][77] 4 nutrition counselling/advice evaluations [78][79][80][81] and 8 education/skill development interventions. [82][83][84]…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…These 78 studies have been summarised in online supplementary table 2 and grouped according to the policy areas of the NOURISHING framework (table 1). There were 5 articles examining food labelling, [18][19][20][21][22] 21 relating to healthy food provision (predominantly in schools), 10 reporting economic interventions (predominantly subsidies/discounts), [44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53] 10 evaluating food composition strategies (mainly food fortification), [54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63] 10 food retail studies, 64-73 6 food system/supply chain interventions, [54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62] 4 information/public awareness campaigns, [74][75][76][77] 4 nutrition counselling/advice evaluations [78][79][80][81] and 8 education/skill development interventions. [82][83][84]…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… 76 77 Another study compared Indigenous Peoples’ responses to a universal and a culturally adapted and targeted media campaign, suggesting the targeted campaign was more effective than the universal campaign at reducing sugar-sweetened beverage consumption, although the results did not reach statistical significance. 74 …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In Australia, the evaluation of the LiveLighter mass media campaign targeting sugary drinks indicates a high campaign recall and modest reductions in SSBs [ 4 , 9 - 11 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%