Effects of physical activity calorie equivalent food labelling to reduce food selection and consumption: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled studies

Background: There is limited evidence that nutritional labelling on food/drinks is changing eating behaviours. Physical activity calorie equivalent (PACE) food labelling aims to provide the public with information about the amount of physical activity required to expend the number of kilocalories in food/drinks (eg, calories in this pizza requires 45 min of running to burn), to encourage healthier food choices and reduce disease. Objective: We aimed to systematically search for randomised controlled trials and experimental studies of the effects of PACE food labelling on the selection, purchase or consumption of food/drinks. Methods: PACE food labelling was compared with any other type of food labelling or no labelling (comparator). Reports were identified by searching electronic databases, websites and social media platforms. Inverse variance meta-analysis was used to summarise evidence. Weighted mean differences (WMD) and 95% CIs were used to describe between-group differences using a random effects model. Results: 15 studies were eligible for inclusion. When PACE labelling was displayed on food/drinks and menus, significantly fewer calories were selected, relative to comparator labelling (WMD=-64.9 kcal, 95% CI -103.2 to -26.6, p=0.009, n=4606). Presenting participants with PACE food labelling results in the consumption of significantly fewer calories (WMD=-80.4 kcal, 95% CI-136.7 to -24.2, p=0.005, n=486) relative to comparator food labelling. Conclusion: Based on current evidence PACE food labelling may reduce the number of kilocalories selected from menus and decrease the number of kilocalories/grams of food consumed by the public, compared with other types of food labelling/no labelling. Trial registration number: CRD42018088567

Accelerometer-Measured Physical Activity Data Sets (Global Physical Activity Data Set Catalogue) That Include Markers of Cardiometabolic Health: Systematic Scoping Review

Background: Cardiovascular disease accounts for 17.9 million deaths globally each year. Many research study data sets have been collected to answer questions regarding the relationship between cardiometabolic health and accelerometer-measured physical activity. This scoping review aimed to map the available data sets that have collected accelerometer-measured physical activity and cardiometabolic health markers. These data were then used to inform the development of a publicly available resource, the Global Physical Activity Data set (GPAD) catalogue.Objective: This review aimed to systematically identify data sets that have measured physical activity using accelerometers and cardiometabolic health markers using either an observational or interventional study design.Methods: Databases, trial registries, and gray literature (inception until February 2021; updated search from February 2021 to September 2022) were systematically searched to identify studies that analyzed data sets of physical activity and cardiometabolic health outcomes. To be eligible for inclusion, data sets must have measured physical activity using an accelerometric device in adults aged ≥18 years; a sample size >400 participants (unless recruited participants in a low- and middle-income country where a sample size threshold was reduced to 100); used an observational, longitudinal, or trial-based study design; and collected at least 1 cardiometabolic health marker (unless only body mass was measured). Two reviewers screened the search results to identify eligible studies, and from these, the unique names of each data set were recorded, and characteristics about each data set were extracted from several sources.Results: A total of 17,391 study reports were identified, and after screening, 319 were eligible, with 122 unique data sets in these study reports meeting the review inclusion criteria. Data sets were found in 49 countries across 5 continents, with the most developed in Europe (n=53) and the least in Africa and Oceania (n=4 and n=3, respectively). The most common accelerometric brand and device wear location was Actigraph and the waist, respectively. Height and body mass were the most frequently measured cardiometabolic health markers in the data sets (119/122, 97.5% data sets), followed by blood pressure (82/122, 67.2% data sets). The number of participants in the included data sets ranged from 103,712 to 120. Once the review processes had been completed, the GPAD catalogue was developed to house all the identified data sets.Conclusions: This review identified and mapped the contents of data sets from around the world that have collected potentially harmonizable accelerometer-measured physical activity and cardiometabolic health markers. The GPAD catalogue is a web-based open-source resource developed from the results of this review, which aims to facilitate the harmonization of data sets to produce evidence that will reduce the burden of disease from physical inactivity