Academic Journal
Προβολή σε EDS

Evaluation of a supermarket placement strategy to nudge healthier dietary habits: synopsis of the WRAPPED study.

Λεπτομέρειες βιβλιογραφικής εγγραφής
Τίτλος: Evaluation of a supermarket placement strategy to nudge healthier dietary habits: synopsis of the WRAPPED study.
Συγγραφείς: Vogel C; Centre for Food Policy, City St George's, University of London, London, UK.; Medical Research Council Lifecourse Epidemiology Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.; National Institute for Health Research Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University of Southampton and University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK., Crozier S; Medical Research Council Lifecourse Epidemiology Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.; National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration Wessex, Southampton, Southampton, UK., Dhuria P; Medical Research Council Lifecourse Epidemiology Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK., Lawrence W; Primary Care, Population Science and Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK., Moon G; Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK., Muir S; Medical Research Council Lifecourse Epidemiology Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK., Takahashi M; Southampton Health Technology Assessments Centre, Wessex Institute, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK., Cooper K; Southampton Health Technology Assessments Centre, Wessex Institute, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK., Lord J; Southampton Health Technology Assessments Centre, Wessex Institute, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK., Cade J; School of Food Science and Nutrition, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK., Ball K; Institute of Physical Activity and Nutrition Research, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia., Cooper C; Medical Research Council Lifecourse Epidemiology Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK., Baird J; Medical Research Council Lifecourse Epidemiology Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.; National Institute for Health Research Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University of Southampton and University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.; National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration Wessex, Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Πηγή: Public health research (Southampton, England) [Public Health Res (Southampt)] 2026 Jun; Vol. 14 (14), pp. 1-33.
Τύπος έκδοσης: Journal Article
Γλώσσα: English
Στοιχεία περιοδικού: Publisher: NIHR Journals Library Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 101653231 Publication Model: Print Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 2050-439X (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 20504381 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Public Health Res (Southampt) Subsets: MEDLINE
Imprint Name(s): Original Publication: Southampton (UK) : NIHR Journals Library, [2013]-
Ιατρικοί όροι (MeSH): Health Promotion*/methods , Food Markets* , Diet, Healthy* , Food Supply* , Feeding Behavior* , Commerce*, Humans ; Fruit ; Vegetables ; Female ; Adult ; Middle Aged ; Adolescent ; England ; Prospective Studies ; Young Adult ; Food Preferences ; COVID-19
Περίληψη: Background: Poor diet is a leading risk factor of non-communicable diseases. Product placement strategies in retail outlets can influence customers' food preferences. The United Kingdom government introduced legislation in October 2022 restricting chain retailers from using location promotions on unhealthy food and drinks. High-quality scientific evidence is needed to inform the inclusion of healthier product placement approaches into these regulations. In the context of Brexit, COVID-19 and the cost-of-living crisis, this study assessed whether positioning an expanded fresh fruit and vegetable section near store entrances in discount supermarkets, which do not routinely market produce this way, improved store sales, household purchasing and diet.
Methods and Limitations: This natural experiment had a prospective matched controlled cluster design, involving 36 stores (18 intervention and 18 control) across England. The intervention was implemented continuously for 6 months. Control stores were matched on store sales, customer profiles and neighbourhood deprivation. Participants were women, aged 18-60 years, with loyalty cards and were assigned to their primary store (n = 280 intervention and n = 300 control). Weekly store sales and household data from loyalty cards were provided by the collaborating supermarket chain. Dietary quality, household food waste and demographic characteristics were collected through questionnaires. A process evaluation and economic evaluation were completed.
Results: Store-level sales of fruit and vegetables were greater in intervention stores than predicted at intervention implementation and 3 and 6 months' follow-up, equivalent to ≈ 2525, ≈ 1940 and ≈ 1450 extra portions per store per week, respectively. Effect sizes were somewhat stronger in stores where the produce section moved forwards more than 14 m. The proportion of households purchasing fruit and vegetables were somewhat protected among intervention compared to control participants after 3 and 6 months. Changes in dietary quality were small but generally in the expected direction for health benefit. Changes in frequency of household fruit and vegetable waste were negligible at 3 months' follow-up but increased at 6 months. The intervention was implemented according to the study protocol, with marked differences in the positioning of fresh fruit and vegetables between intervention and control stores post-intervention implementation. Fresh fruit and vegetable availability increased post intervention in intervention compared with control stores. Interviews with store staff demonstrated that changes in staff attitudes had a positive reinforcing effect on intervention implementation. Assessment of the policy context showed that stakeholders across the food system largely support the United Kingdom government's unhealthy placement ban; some felt it does not go far enough.
Future Work: This study shows that positioning produce sections near supermarket entrances can improve the nutrition profile of store sales and may improve household purchasing and diet. The United Kingdom Food (Promotion and Placement) Regulations could be refined to require a produce section near supermarket entrances to increase its health impact. Future research should continue to build the evidence for which healthy eating interventions are effective in retail outlets. Further evaluations of real-world supermarket intervention studies using robust scientific study designs are required, alongside process and economic evaluations, to provide evidence for policy intervention to improve retail food environments in the United Kingdom and internationally.
Funding: This synopsis presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme as award number 17/44/46.
References: Vogel C, Crozier S, Dhuria P, Lord J, Moon G, Lawrence W, et al. Impact of supermarket fruit and vegetable placement on store sales, customer purchasing, diet and household waste: A prospective matched-controlled cluster trial. PLOS Med 2026 Mar 31;23:e1004575. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004575.
Baird J, Dhuria P, Payne H, Crozier S, Lawrence W, Vogel C. Implementation of a UK supermarket intervention to increase purchasing of fresh fruit and vegetables: process evaluation of the WRAPPED natural experiment. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2024;21:128.
Collaborators GBDRF. Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet 2020;396:1223–49.
Scarborough P, Bhatnagar P, Wickramasinghe KK, Allender S, Foster C, Rayner M. The economic burden of ill health due to diet, physical inactivity, smoking, alcohol and obesity in the UK: an update to 2006–07 NHS costs. J Public Health 2011;33:527–35.
National Health Service Digital. National Child Measurement Programme, England, 2022/23 School Year. 2023. URL: https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/national-child-measurement-programme/2022-23-school-year (accessed 8 February 2026).
Office for National Statistics. Health State Life Expectancies by National Deprivation Deciles, England: 2018 to 2020. London; 2022. URL: www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/healthinequalities/bulletins/healthstatelifeexpectanciesbyindexofmultipledeprivationimd/2018to2020 (accessed 8 February 2026).
Beauchamp A, Backholer K, Magliano D, Peeters A. The effect of obesity prevention interventions according to socioeconomic position: a systematic review. Obes Rev 2014;15:541–54.
Lorenc T, Petticrew M, Welch V, Tugwell P. What types of interventions generate inequalities? Evidence from systematic reviews. J Epidemiol Community Health 2013;67:190–3.
McGill R, Anwar E, Orton L, Bromley H, Lloyd-Williams F, O’Flaherty M, et al. Are interventions to promote healthy eating equally effective for all? Systematic review of socioeconomic inequalities in impact. BMC Public Health 2015;15:457.
Swinburn BA, Kraak VI, Allender S, Atkins VJ, Baker PI, Bogard JR, et al. The global syndemic of obesity, undernutrition, and climate change: the lancet commission report. Lancet 2019;393:791–846.
Vogel C, Crozier S, Dhuria P, Shand C, Lawrence W, Cade J, et al. Protocol of a natural experiment to evaluate a supermarket intervention to improve food purchasing and dietary behaviours of women (WRAPPED study) in England: a prospective matched controlled cluster design. BMJ Open 2020;10:e036758.
Food Foundation. The Broken Plate 2023. 2023. URL: https://foodfoundation.org.uk/publication/broken-plate-2023 (accessed 8 February 2026).
Bennett R, Zorbas C, Huse O, Peeters A, Cameron AJ, Sacks G, Backholer K. Prevalence of healthy and unhealthy food and beverage price promotions and their potential influence on shopper purchasing behaviour: a systematic review of the literature. Obes Rev 2020;21:e12948.
Obesity Health Alliance. Out of Place: The Extent of Unhealthy Foods in Prime Locations in Supermarkets. Food Active; 2018. URL: https://obesityhealthalliance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Out-of-Place-Obesity-Health-Alliance-2.pdf (accessed 8 February 2026).
Black C, Ntani G, Inskip H, Cooper C, Cummins S, Moon G, Baird J. Measuring the healthfulness of food retail stores: variations by store type and neighbourhood deprivation. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2014;11:69.
Vogel C, Ntani G, Inskip H, Barker M, Cummins S, Cooper C, et al. Education and the relationship between supermarket environment and diet. Am J Prev Med 2016;51:e27–e34.
Pechey R, Monsivais P. Supermarket choice, shopping behavior, socioeconomic status, and food purchases. Am J Prev Med 2015;49:868–77.
Adam A, Jensen JD. What is the effectiveness of obesity related interventions at retail grocery stores and supermarkets? – a systematic review. BMC Public Health 2016;16:1247.
Cameron AJ, Charlton E, Ngan WW, Sacks G. A systematic review of the effectiveness of supermarket-based interventions involving product, promotion, or place on the healthiness of consumer purchases. Curr Nutr Rep 2016;5:129–38.
Vogel C, Piernas C. The retail food environment. In Evans C, editor. Transforming Food Environments. London, UK: CRC Press; 2022. pp. 63–78.
Shaw SC, Ntani G, Baird J, Vogel CA. A systematic review of the influences of food store product placement on dietary-related outcomes. Nutr Rev 2020;78:1030–45.
Vogel C, Crozier S, Penn-Newman D, Ball K, Moon G, Lord J, et al. Altering product placement to create a healthier layout in supermarkets: outcomes on store sales, customer purchasing, and diet in a prospective matched controlled cluster study. PLOS Med 2021;18:e1003729.
UK Government. The Food (Promotion and Placement) (England) Regulations 2021. 2021. URL: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2021/9780348226195 (accessed 8 February 2026).
Muir S, Dhuria P, Roe E, Lawrence W, Baird J, Vogel C. UK government’s new placement legislation is a ‘good first step’: a rapid qualitative analysis of consumer, business, enforcement and health stakeholder perspectives. BMC Med 2023;21:33.
Muir S, Dhuria P, Vogel C. Government must proceed with landmark anti-obesity regulations in England. BMJ 2022;378:o2358.
Appelhans BM, French SA, Tangney CC, Powell LM, Wang Y. To what extent do food purchases reflect shoppers’ diet quality and nutrient intake? Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2017;14:46.
Shaw SC, Ntani G, Baird J, Vogel CA. A systematic review of the influences of food store product placement on dietary-related outcomes. Nutr Rev 2020; 78:1030–45.
Kantar Worldpanel. Great Britain Grocery Market Share. Kantar Worldpanel Update; 2019. URL: https://market.worldpanelbynumerator.com/en/grocery-market-share/great-britain (accessed 8 February 2026).
Hollands GJ, Bignardi G, Johnston M, Kelly MP, Ogilvie D, Petticrew M, et al. The TIPPME intervention typology for changing environments to change behaviour. Nat Hum Behav 2017;1:0140.
Vogel C, Dijkstra C, Huitink M, Dhuria P, Poelman MP, Mackenbach JD, et al. Real-life experiments in supermarkets to encourage healthy dietary-related behaviours: opportunities, challenges and lessons learned. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2023;20:73.
Ministry of Housing CLG. The English Indices of Deprivation 2019. London: HM Government; 2019.
Dhana K, Haines J, Liu G, Zhang C, Wang X, Field AE, et al. Association between maternal adherence to healthy lifestyle practices and risk of obesity in offspring: results from two prospective cohort studies of mother-child pairs in the United States. BMJ 2018;362:k2486.
Barker D, Barker M, Fleming T, Lampl M. Developmental biology: support mothers to secure future public health. Nature 2013;504:209–11.
Food Standards Agency. The Food and You Survey. London; 2019. URL: www.food.gov.uk/research/food-and-you-2-technical-report-introduction (accessed 8 February 2026).
Maynard M. Shopping habits: how do they differ between men and women? The Grocer 2021.
Ni Mhurchu C, Blakely T, Wall J, Rodgers A, Jiang Y, Wilton J. Strategies to promote healthier food purchases: a pilot supermarket intervention study. Public Health Nutr 2007;10:608–15.
Crozier SR, Inskip HM, Barker ME, Lawrence WT, Cooper C, Robinson SM; SWS Study Group. Development of a 20-item food frequency questionnaire to assess a ‘prudent’ dietary pattern among young women in Southampton. Eur J Clin Nutr 2010;64:99–104.
Jarman M, Fisk CM, Ntani G, Crozier SR, Godfrey KM, Inskip HM, et al.; Southampton Women’s Survey Study Group. Assessing diets of three-year-old children: evaluation of an FFQ. Public Health Nutr 2014;17:1069–77.
Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ 2015;350:h1258.
Penfold RB, Zhang F. Use of interrupted time series analysis in evaluating health care quality improvements. Acad Pediatr 2013;13:S38–44.
Rice K, Higgins JPT, Lumley T. A re-evaluation of fixed effect(s) meta-analysis. J R Stat Soc 2018;181:205–27.
Ejlerskov KT, Sharp SJ, Stead M, Adamson AJ, White M, Adams J. Supermarket policies on less-healthy food at checkouts: natural experimental evaluation using interrupted time series analyses of purchases. PLOS Med 2018;15:e1002712.
Armitage P, Berry G. Statistical Methods in Medical Research. 3rd edn. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science Ltd; 2002.
Greenland S, Pearl J, Robins JM. Causal diagrams for epidemiologic research. Epidemiology 1999;10:37–48.
Braun V, Clarke V. Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qual Res Sport Exerc Health 2019;11:589–97.
Vindrola-Padros C. Doing rapid qualitative research. 1st ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publishing; 2021.
Albert SL, Langellier BA, Sharif MZ, Chan-Golston AM, Prelip ML, Elena Garcia R, et al. A corner store intervention to improve access to fruits and vegetables in two Latino communities. Public Health Nutr 2017;20:2249–59.
Thorndike AN, Bright OM, Dimond MA, Fishman R, Levy DE. Choice architecture to promote fruit and vegetable purchases by families participating in the Special Supplemental Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC): randomized corner store pilot study. Public Health Nutr 2017;20:1297–305.
Toft U, Winkler LL, Mikkelsen BE, Bloch P, Glumer C. Discounts on fruit and vegetables combined with a space management intervention increased sales in supermarkets. Eur J Clin Nutr 2017;71:476–80.
Stuber JM, Mackenbach JD, de Bruijn GJ, Gillebaart M, Hoenink JC, Middel CNH, et al.; SUPREME NUDGE consortium. Real-world nudging, pricing, and mobile physical activity coaching was insufficient to improve lifestyle behaviours and cardiometabolic health: the Supreme Nudge parallel cluster-randomised controlled supermarket trial. BMC Med 2024;22:52.
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs. Family Food FYE 2022. London; 2023. URL: www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-food-fye-2023 (accessed 8 February 2026).
Dauchet L, Amouyel P, Dallongeville J. Fruit and vegetable consumption and risk of stroke: a meta-analysis of cohort studies. Neurology 2005;65:1193–7.
Dauchet L, Amouyel P, Hercberg S, Dallongeville J. Fruit and vegetable consumption and risk of coronary heart disease: a meta-analysis of cohort studies. J Nutr 2006;136:2588–93.
Gardner B, Sheals K, Wardle J, McGowan L. Putting habit into practice, and practice into habit: a process evaluation and exploration of the acceptability of a habit-based dietary behaviour change intervention. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2014;11:135.
Baranowski T, Missaghian M, Broadfoot A, Watson K, Cullen K, Nicklas T, et al. Fruit and vegetable shopping practices and social support scales: a validation. J Nutr Educ Behav 2006;38:340–51.
Shove E, Pantzar M, Watson MF. The Dynamics of Social Practice: Everyday Life and How It Changes. London, UK: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2012.
Brimblecombe J, Miles B, Chappell E, De Silva K, Ferguson M, Mah C, et al. Implementation of a food retail intervention to reduce purchase of unhealthy food and beverages in remote Australia: mixed-method evaluation using the consolidated framework for implementation research. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2023;20:20.
Middel CNH, Schuitmaker-Warnaar TJ, Mackenbach JD, Broerse JEW. Systematic review: a systems innovation perspective on barriers and facilitators for the implementation of healthy food-store interventions. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2019;16:108.
Gelman A, Hill, J., Vehtari, A. Regression and Other Stories. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2020.
Fetters MD, Curry LA, Creswell JW. Achieving integration in mixed methods designs – principles and practices. Health Serv Res 2013;48:2134–56.
Ntani G. Statistical Approaches to the Analysis of Hierarchical Data Using Simulations and Real Data from a Study of Musculoskeletal Symptoms. Doctoral Thesis. Southampton, UK: University of Southampton; 2017.
His Majesty’s Treasury.; 2022. URL: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1063330/Green_Book_2022.pdf (accessed 23 October 2025).
Kypridemos C, Allen K, Hickey GL, Guzman-Castillo M, Bandosz P, Buchan I, et al. Cardiovascular screening to reduce the burden from cardiovascular disease: microsimulation study to quantify policy options. BMJ 2016;353:i2793.
Halvorsen RE, Elvestad M, Molin M, Aune D. Fruit and vegetable consumption and the risk of type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies. BMJ Nutr Prev Health 2021;4:519–31.
Aune D, Giovannucci E, Boffetta P, Fadnes LT, Keum NN, Norat T, et al. Fruit and vegetable intake and the risk of cardiovascular disease, total cancer and all-cause mortality – a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies. Int J Epidemiol 2017;46:1029–56.
Hippisley-Cox J, Coupland C. Development and validation of risk prediction algorithms to estimate future risk of common cancers in men and women: prospective cohort study. BMJ Open 2015;5:e007825.
Hippisley-Cox J, Coupland C. Development and validation of risk prediction equations to estimate survival in patients with colorectal cancer: cohort study. BMJ 2017;357:j2497.
Hippisley-Cox J, Coupland C. Development and validation of QDiabetes – 2018 risk prediction algorithm to estimate future risk of type 2 diabetes: cohort study. BMJ 2017;359:j5019.
Hippisley-Cox J, Coupland C, Brindle P. Development and validation of QRISK3 risk prediction algorithms to estimate future risk of cardiovascular disease: prospective cohort study. BMJ 2017;357:j2099.
McNamara S, Schneider PP, Love-Koh J, Doran T, Gutacker N. Quality-adjusted life expectancy norms for the English population. Value Health 2023;26:163–9.
Sullivan PW, Slejko JF, Sculpher MJ, Ghushchyan V. Catalogue of EQ-5D scores for the United Kingdom. Med Decis Making 2011;31:800–4.
Alva M, Gray A, Mihaylova B, Leal J, Holman R. The impact of diabetes‐related complications on healthcare costs: new results from the UKPDS (UKPDS 84). Diabet Med 2015;32:459–66.
Capehorn M, Hallén N, Baker-Knight J, Glah D, Hunt B. Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of once-weekly semaglutide 1 mg versus empagliflozin 25 mg for treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes in the UK setting. Diabetes Ther 2021;12:537–55.
Jones KB, A. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2021. 2021. URL: www.pssru.ac.uk/project-pages/unit-costs/unit-costs-2020 (accessed 29 June 2021).
Laudicella M, Walsh B, Burns E, Smith PC. Cost of care for cancer patients in England: evidence from population-based patient-level data. Br J Cancer 2016;114:1286–92.
Office for National Statistics. Age, Ethnic Group and Sex. 2023. URL: www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/ethnicity/articles/ethnicgroupbyageandsexenglandandwales/census2021 (accessed 8 February 2026).
National Health Service England. Health Survey for England, 2021: Data Tables. 2022. URL: https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/health-survey-for-england/2021/health-survey-for-england-2021-data-tables (accessed 8 February 2026).
Office for National Statistics. Smoking Habits in the UK and Its Constituent Countries. 2024. URL: www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/healthandlifeexpectancies/bulletins/adultsmokinghabitsingreatbritain/2024 (accessed 8 February 2026).
Office for National Statistics. Age, Marital and Civil Partnership Status and Sex. 2023. URL: www.ons.gov.uk/releases/marriagesinenglandandwales2023 (accessed 8 February 2026).
Office for National Statistics. Age, Highest Level of Qualification and Sex. 2023. URL: www.ons.gov.uk/datasets/RM055/editions/2021/versions/1 (accessed 8 February 2026).
Gov.UK. English Indices of Deprivation 2019. 2019. URL: www.gov.uk/government/statistics/english-indices-of-deprivation-2019 (accessed 8 February 2026).
Office for National Statistics. Age, Economic Activity Status Last Week and Sex. 2023. URL: www.ons.gov.uk/datasets/RM024/editions/2021/versions/3 (accessed 8 February 2026).
WRAPPED study team. Supporting the effective implementation of UK HFSS promotions and placement regulations. 2022. URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSI40VKimBk (accessed 30 April 2026).
Contributed Indexing: Keywords: DIET; DIETARY INEQUALITIES; FOOD ENVIRONMENT; FOOD PURCHASING; PRODUCT PLACEMENT
Local Abstract: [plain-language-summary] Supermarkets are a major source of food for families. Discount supermarkets have less-healthy environments than other supermarkets and are used more by families living on lower incomes. We worked with a United Kingdom discount supermarket chain to assess if moving a bigger fresh fruit and vegetable section near store entrances improves what people buy. A total of 580 women aged 18–60 years who regularly shopped at one of 36 stores (18 with changes and 18 with no changes) across England took part. Women did a survey over the phone four times (once before the change in layout and 1, 3 and 6 months after). The survey asked about the foods they and their young children (aged 2–6 years) usually ate, where they shopped for food and how much they spent each week, as well as their age, number of children and highest educational qualification. Information about the food each woman bought from loyalty card data and the total sales of fruit and vegetables for each store in the study was given by the supermarket. We found that the sales of fruit and vegetables were higher in stores where they had been moved to the front when compared to stores where they remained at the back of the store, though the size of the impact decreased over time. We found that during the time of Brexit, COVID-19 and the cost-of-living crisis, all families bought fewer fruit and vegetables over time. Families who shopped mostly at study stores with fruit and vegetables near the front entrance had a smaller decline in fruit and vegetable purchases than families who shopped at stores with fruit and vegetables towards the back. Our study provides new information that governments could use to make all supermarkets place fruit and vegetables near the front of their stores so people buy and eat more fresh produce.
Entry Date(s): Date Created: 20260605 Date Completed: 20260610 Latest Revision: 20260610
Update Code: 20260611
DOI: 10.3310/KSDT8756
PMID: 42247213
Βάση Δεδομένων: MEDLINE
Περιγραφή
ISSN:2050-439X
DOI:10.3310/KSDT8756