Online food delivery services like Just Eat and Grubhub facilitate online ordering and home delivery of food prepared away-from-home. It is poorly understood how these services are used and by whom. This study investigated the prevalence of online food delivery service use and sociodemographic characteristics of customers, in and across Australia, Canada, Mexico, the UK, and the USA. We analyzed online survey data (n = 19,378) from the International Food Policy Study, conducted in 2018. We identified respondents who reported any online food delivery service use in the past 7 days and calculated the frequency of use and number of meals ordered. We investigated whether odds of any online food delivery service use in the past 7 days differed by sociodemographic characteristics using adjusted logistic regression. Overall, 15% of respondents (n = 2929) reported online food delivery service use, with the greatest prevalence amongst respondents in Mexico (n = 839 (26%)). Online food delivery services had most frequently been used once and the median number of meals purchased through this mode of order was two. Odds of any online food delivery service use were lower per additional year of age (OR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.94, 0.95) and greater for respondents who were male (OR: 1.50; 95% CI: 1.35, 1.66), that identified with an ethnic minority (OR: 1.57; 95% CI: 1.38, 1.78), were highly educated (OR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.46, 1.90), or living with children (OR: 2.71; 95% CI: 2.44, 3.01). Further research is required to explore how online food delivery services may influence diet and health.

Mandatory front-of-pack (FOP) labelling was proposed in Canada to highlight foods with high contents of sugars, sodium and/or saturated fats, which would be displayed on labels along with the mandatory Nutrition Facts table and voluntary nutrition claims. In an online survey, participants (n = 1997) were randomized to one of four FOP labelling conditions: 1) control, 2) warning label, 3) health star rating or 4) traffic light labelling. Participants were shown four drinks (a healthier drink with or without a disease risk reduction claim, a healthier drink with or without a nutrient content claim, a less healthy drink with or without a disease risk reduction claim and a less healthy drink with or without a nutrient content claim) in random order and one at a time. Participants rated perceived product healthfulness and purchase intentions using a 7-point Likert scale. Participants could access the Nutrition Facts table while viewing labels. Results showed less healthy drinks displaying any FOP labelling were perceived as less healthy compared to the control. In healthier drinks, health star rating and traffic light labelling created a 'halo' effect, which was not observed with warning labels. Similar results were observed with purchase intentions. Drinks displaying a disease risk reduction claim were perceived as healthier than those without (p < 0.001) regardless of product's healthfulness. The effect of a nutrient content claim was not significantly different. The effect of FOP labelling and claims was mitigated for those who used the Nutrition Facts table. FOP labelling was likely helpful for consumers with different levels of health literacy. Overall, FOP labelling had significantly stronger influence than nutrition claims on consumers' perceptions; however, the effect of each FOP label varied on healthier and less healthy drinks.

A between-groups experiment examined the salience of front-of-package (FOP) symbols. Adults from Canada, the US, Australia, and the UK completed an online survey (n = 11,617). Respondents were randomized to view cereal boxes displaying one of 11 FOP label conditions for ‘high’ levels of sugar and saturated fat: control (no FOP symbol), red circle, red ‘stop sign’, magnifying glass, magnifying glass + exclamation mark, and ‘caution’ triangle + exclamation mark, plus each of these five conditions accompanied by a ‘high in’ text descriptor. Participants identified the amount of saturated fat and sugar in the product (‘low’/’moderate’/’high’). Participants were more likely to correctly identify the product as ‘high’ in saturated fat or sugar when shown the stop sign, triangle + exclamation mark, red circle, or magnifying glass + exclamation mark symbols incorporating ‘high in’ text (p < 0.01). The magnifying glass was the least effective symbol. The stop sign (37.7%) and triangle + exclamation mark (22.0%) were most frequently selected as the best symbol for indicating high nutrient amounts. Overall, FOP labels with ‘high in’ descriptions, red color and intuitive ‘warning’ symbols (e.g., stop signs, exclamation marks, ‘caution’ triangles) were more effective at communicating high levels of nutrients of public health concern in a time-limited environment.

Close economic ties encourage production and trade of meat between Canada, Mexico, and the US. Understanding the patterns of red and processed meat consumption in North America may inform policies designed to reduce meat consumption and bolster environmental and public health efforts across the continent. We used nationally-representative cross-sectional survey data to analyze consumption of unprocessed red meat; processed meat; and total red and processed meat. Generalized linear models were used to separately estimate probability of consumption and adjusted mean intake. Prevalence of total meat consumers was higher in the US (73.6, 95% CI: 72.3–74.8%) than in Canada (65.6, 63.9–67.2%) or Mexico (62.7, 58.1–67.2%). Men were more likely to consume unprocessed red, processed, and total meat, and had larger estimated intakes. In Mexico, high wealth individuals were more likely to consume all three categories of meat. In the US and Canada, those with high education were less likely to consume total and processed meat. Estimated mean intake of unprocessed red, processed, and total meat did not differ across sociodemographic strata. Overall consumption of red and processed meat remains high in North America. Policies to reduce meat consumption are appropriate for all three countries.

Objectives The study objectives were to examine: (1) adolescents’ media viewing habits, (2) associations with media viewing and self-reported exposure to unhealthy food and beverage advertising and (3) differences in trends among younger and older adolescents in six high and upper middle-income countries. Design Repeat cross-sectional online survey. Setting Australia, Canada, Chile, Mexico, the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States of America (USA). Participants Respondents to the International Food Policy Study who provided information on all variables of interest in November–December 2019 aged 10–17 years (n=9171). Outcome measures Self-reported exposure to screen-based media (screen time by media channel), use of social media platforms and self-reported location and frequency of exposure to unhealthy food and beverage advertising. Results The average amount of time spent in front of various screens ranged from 7.6 hours to 10.2 hours across countries per week day, which may include possible viewing of multiple media channels simultaneously. Overall, Instagram was the most popular social media platform (52%–68% by country), followed by Facebook (42%–79%) and Snapchat (28%–52%). The percentage of respondents who self-reported having seen unhealthy food advertisements in the past 30 days was highest on television (43%–69%), followed by digital media (27%–60%) and gaming applications (10%–17%). Self-reported daily exposure to advertising varied between countries for sugary drinks (10%–43%) and fast food (19%–44%) and was positively associated with self-reported screen time. Self-reported exposure to screen-based media and social media platforms differed by sociodemographic characteristics and was higher among older adolescents than younger adolescents. Conclusions The important amount of time spent on screen-based media reported by adolescents and large percentage of adolescents reporting social media usage, coupled with high rates of self-reported advertising exposure, support the need for policies to restrict marketing of unhealthy food and beverages appealing to adolescents on screen-based media.