Sociodemographic differences in self-reported exposure to high fat, salt and sugar food and drink advertising: a cross-sectional analysis of 2019 UK panel data.
Boyland, Emma J
de Vocht, Frank
MetadataShow full item record
Yau, A., Adams, J., Boyland, E. J., Burgoine, T., Cornelsen, L., de Vocht, F., Egan, M., et al. (2021). Sociodemographic differences in self-reported exposure to high fat, salt and sugar food and drink advertising: a cross-sectional analysis of 2019 UK panel data.. BMJ open, 11 (4), e048139. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048139
Objectives To explore sociodemographic differences in exposure to advertising for foods and drinks high in fat, salt and sugar (HFSS) and whether exposure is associated with body mass index (BMI). Design Cross-sectional survey Setting United Kingdom Participants 1552 adults recruited to the Kantar Fast Moving Consumer Goods panel for London and the North of England Outcome measures Self-reported advertising exposure stratified by product/service advertised (processed HFSS foods; sugary drinks; sugary cereals; sweet snacks; fast food or digital food delivery services) and advertising setting (traditional; digital; recreational; functional or transport); BMI and sociodemographic characteristics. Results Overall, 84.7% of participants reported exposure to HFSS advertising in the past 7 days. Participants in the middle (vs high) socioeconomic group had higher odds of overall self-reported exposure (OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.06-2.07). Participants in the low (vs high) socioeconomic group had higher odds of reporting exposure to advertising for three of five product categories (ORs ranging from 1.36 to 1.67), advertising for digital food delivery services (OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.05-2.05), traditional advertising (OR 1.44; 95% CI 1.00-2.08) and digital advertising (OR 1.50; 95% CI 1.06-2.14). Younger adults (18-34 years vs ≥65 years) had higher odds of reporting exposure to advertising for digital food delivery services (OR 2.08; 95% CI 1.20-3.59), digital advertising (OR 3.93; 95% CI 2.18-7.08) and advertising across transport networks (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.11-3.48). Exposure to advertising for digital food delivery services (OR 1.40; 95% CI 1.05-1.88), digital advertising (OR 1.80; 95% CI 1.33-2.44) and advertising in recreational environments (OR 1.46; 95% CI 1.02-2.09) were associated with increased odds of obesity. Conclusions Exposure to less healthy product advertising was prevalent, with adults in lower socioeconomic groups and younger adults more likely to report exposure. Broader restrictions may be needed to reduce sociodemographic differences in exposure to less healthy product advertising.
Humans, Cross-Sectional Studies, Advertising, Television, Food, Adult, London, England, Self Report, United Kingdom, Sugars
The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Public Health Research is a partnership between the Universities of Sheffield; Bristol; Cambridge; Imperial; and University College London; The London School for Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM); LiLaC – a collaboration between the Universities of Liverpool and Lancaster; and Fuse - The Centre for Translational Research in Public Health, a collaboration between Newcastle, Durham, Northumbria, Sunderland and Teesside Universities. This study is funded by the NIHR School for Public Health Research (SPHR) (Grant Reference Number PD-SPH-2015). SC is also funded by Health Data Research UK (HDR-UK). HDR-UK is an initiative funded by the UK Research and Innovation, Department of Health and Social Care (England) and the devolved administrations, and leading medical research charities. JA, MW and TB are supported by the MRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge [grant number MC/UU/12015/6] and Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), a UK Clinical Research Collaboration (UKCRC) Public Health Research Centre of Excellence. Funding for CEDAR from the British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, Economic and Social Research Council, Medical Research Council, the National Institute for Health Research [grant numbers ES/G007462/1 and MR/K023187/1], and the Wellcome Trust [grant number 087636/Z/08/Z], under the auspices of the UK Clinical Research Collaboration, is gratefully acknowledged. CT is funded by the NIHR Applied Research Collaboration East of England. AAL is a member of Fuse, the Centre for Translational Research in Public Health (www.fuse.ac.uk). Fuse is a Public Health Research Centre of Excellence funded by the five North East Universities of Durham, Newcastle, Northumbria, Sunderland and Teesside. FdV is partly funded by NIHR Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West) at University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust.
Wellcome Trust (087636/Z/08/Z)
Embargo Lift Date
External DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048139
This record's URL: https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/319286
All rights reserved