Faculty Bibliography

In 2011, a National Academy of Medicine report recommended that packaged food in the U.S. display a uniform front-of-package nutrition label, using a system such as a 0-3 star ranking. Few studies have directly compared this to other labels to determine which best informs consumers and encourages healthier purchases. In 2013, we randomized adult participants (N=1247) in an Internet-based survey to one of six conditions: no label control; single traffic light; multiple traffic light; Facts Up Front; NuVal; or 0-3 star ranking. We compared groups on purchase intentions and accuracy of participants' interpretation of food labels. There were no differences in the nutritional quality of hypothetical shopping baskets across conditions (p=0.845). All labels improved consumers' abilities to judge the nutritional quality of foods relative to no label, but the best designs varied by outcomes. NuVal and multiple traffic light labels led to the greatest accuracy identifying the healthier of two products (p<0.001), while the multiple traffic light also led to the most accurate estimates of saturated fat, sugar, and sodium (p<0.001). The single traffic light outperformed other labels when participants compared nutrient levels between similar products (p<0.03). Single/multiple traffic light and Facts Up Front labels led to the most accurate calories per serving estimations (p<0.001). Although front-of-package labels helped participants more accurately assess products' nutrition information relative to no label, no conditions shifted adults' purchase intentions. Results did not point to a clearly superior label design, but they suggest that a 3-star label might not be best for educating consumers.

The primary objective of this study was to investigate the relationship between neighborhood stigma and sleep in a sample of low-income housing residents in New York City. Data were derived from the NYC Low-Income Housing, Neighborhoods, and Health Study (N = 120). Adults living in low-income housing completed a survey consisting of measures of neighborhood stigma, sleep quality, and sleep duration. Neighborhood stigma and sleep were self-reported. Associations between neighborhood stigma and sleep health were analyzed using generalized linear models with cluster variance estimation. Multivariable models adjusted for age, gender, race/ethnicity, income, education, employment status, obesity, the census block percentage of non-Hispanic black residents, and the census block percentage median household income. Results indicate that a reported negative media perception of the neighborhood was negatively associated with sleep quality and duration (p < 0.01). However, additional research is needed to explore neighborhood stigma as it relates to sleep.

BACKGROUND:This research evaluated the effects of financial incentives and purchase restrictions on food purchasing in a food benefit program for low income people. METHODS:Participants (n=279) were randomized to groups: 1) Incentive- 30% financial incentive for fruits and vegetables purchased with food benefits; 2) Restriction- no purchase of sugar-sweetened beverages, sweet baked goods, or candies with food benefits; 3) Incentive plus Restriction; or 4) Control- no incentive or restrictions. Participants received a study-specific debit card where funds were added monthly for 12-weeks. Food purchase receipts were collected over 16 weeks. Total dollars spent on grocery purchases and by targeted food categories were computed from receipts. Group differences were examined using general linear models. RESULTS:Weekly purchases of fruit significantly increased in the Incentive plus Restriction ($4.8) compared to the Restriction ($1.7) and Control ($2.1) groups (p <.01). Sugar-sweetened beverage purchases significantly decreased in the Incentive plus Restriction (-$0.8 per week) and Restriction ($-1.4 per week) groups compared to the Control group (+$1.5; p< .0001). Sweet baked goods purchases significantly decreased in the Restriction (-$0.70 per week) compared to the Control group (+$0.82 per week; p < .01). CONCLUSIONS:Paired financial incentives and restrictions on foods and beverages purchased with food program funds may support more healthful food purchases compared to no incentives or restrictions. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02643576 .

OBJECTIVE:To identify demographic and consumer characteristics associated with refilling a soft drink at fast-food restaurants and the estimated energy content and volume of those refills. DESIGN/METHODS:Logistic and linear regression with cross-sectional survey data. SETTING/METHODS:Data include fast-food restaurant receipts and consumer surveys collected from restaurants in New York City (all boroughs except Staten Island), and Newark and Jersey City, New Jersey, during 2013 and 2014. SUBJECTS/METHODS:Fast-food restaurant customers (n 11795) from ninety-eight restaurants. RESULTS:Thirty per cent of fast-food customers ordered a refillable soft drink. Nine per cent of fast-food customers with a refillable soft drink reported refilling their beverage (3 % of entire sample). Odds of having a beverage refill were higher among respondents with a refillable soft drink at restaurants with a self-serve refill kiosk (adjusted OR (aOR)=7·37, P<0·001) or who ate in the restaurant (aOR=4·45, P<0·001). KFC (aOR=2·18, P<0·001) and Wendy's (aOR=0·41, P<0·001) customers had higher and lower odds, respectively, of obtaining a refill, compared with Burger King customers. Respondents from New Jersey (aOR=1·47, P<0·001) also had higher odds of refilling their beverage than New York City customers. Customers who got a refill obtained on average 29 more 'beverage ounces' (858 ml) and 250 more 'beverage calories' (1046 kJ) than customers who did not get a refill. CONCLUSIONS:Refilling a beverage was associated with having obtained more beverage calories and beverage ounces. Environmental cues, such as the placement and availability of self-serve beverage refills, may influence consumer beverage choice.

Previous studies have identified an association between socioeconomic status and sleep health. While some research has studied this association among sexual minority groups, including men who have sex with men (MSM), they exclusively focused on US-based populations. The interplay between the two in shaping sleep health has not been previously examined on populations residing outside the US. This study considers both determinants, by investigating whether financial hardship is associated with sleep health among a sample of MSM in Paris, France. Broadcast advertisements were placed on a popular geosocial-networking smartphone application for MSM to direct users in Paris to a web-based survey measuring financial hardship and five dimensions of sleep health as well as socio-demographic characteristics. Modified Poisson models with robust error variance were computed to estimate risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the associations between financial hardship and the following self-reported outcomes: 1) poor sleep quality, 2) short sleep duration; and 3) sleep problems. In total, 580 respondents completed the survey. In this sample, both financial hardship and poor sleep health were common - 45.5% reported that it was extremely, very, or somewhat difficult for them to meet their monthly payments on bills (referred to as "high financial hardship") and 30.1% rated their sleep as fairly bad or very bad (referred to as "poor sleep quality"). Multivariate models revealed that, compared to participants who reported low financial hardship, those who reported high financial hardship were more likely to report poor sleep quality (aRR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.04, 1.77), to report problems falling asleep (aRR: 1.23, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.49), and to report problems staying awake in the daytime (aRR: 3.12, 95% CI: 1.83, 5.31). Future research should investigate whether this relationship is causal and determine whether interventions to reduce financial hardships could promote sleep health among MSM.

By mid-2018, federal policy will require chain restaurants with more than 20 U.S. locations to include calorie information on their menus. Despite high expectations that this policy would encourage healthier eating, most studies of local policies to mandate calorie labels have demonstrated little impact on consumer choice. In this article, the authors adapt Burton and Kees's (2012) conceptual framework for eating behavior change to better understand the limited impact of these policies thus far. Using two surveys of fast-food consumers in Philadelphia, the authors estimate the percentage who might reasonably be expected to respond to calorie labels given the requirements of the Burton and Kees model. They find that as few as 8% of fast-food consumers meet all the model's requirements and, therefore, would be expected to change their eating behavior as a result of calorie information. The authors use the model and findings to consider how calorie-labeling policy could be improved for greater impact.

The objective of this study was to examine the association between financial hardship, condomless anal intercourse and HIV risk among a sample of men who have sex with men (MSM). Users of a popular geosocial networking application in Paris were shown an advertisement with text encouraging them to complete a anonymous web-based survey (n = 580). In adjusted multivariate models, high financial hardship (compared to low financial hardship) was associated with engagement in condomless anal intercourse (aRR 1.28; 95% CI 1.08-1.52), engagement in condomless receptive anal intercourse (aRR 1.34; 95% CI 1.07-1.67), engagement in condomless insertive anal intercourse (aRR 1.30; 95% CI 1.01-1.67), engagement in transactional sex (aRR 2.36; 95% CI 1.47-3.79) and infection with non-HIV STIs (aRR 1.50; 95% CI 1.07-2.10). This study suggests that interventions to reduce financial hardships (e.g., income-based strategies to ensure meeting of basic necessities) could decrease sexual risk behaviors in MSM.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the acceptability of smartphone-based text message- and voice-based ecological momentary assessment (EMA) methods among a sample of low-income housing residents in New York City. Using data from the community-based NYC Low Income Housing, Neighborhoods and Health Study (n = 112), the acceptability of text message- and voice-based EMA methods were assessed via survey. RESULTS: Overall, 88.4% of participants reported that they would participate in a study that utilized text message-based EMA. These analyses showed no appreciable differences by sub-groups (p > .05). Overall, 80.2% of participants reported that they would participate in a study that used voice-based EMA. This voice-based method was least acceptable among participants younger than 25 years old compared to participants of all other ages, chi2(2) = 10.107, p = .006 (among the younger participants 60.7% reported "yes" regarding the anticipated acceptability of voice-based EMA and 39.3% reported "no"). Overall, this work suggests that text message- and voice-based EMA methods are acceptable for use among low-income housing residents. However, the association between age and the acceptability of voice-based EMA suggests that these methods may be less suited for younger populations.

OBJECTIVE: Evidence on the effects of restaurant calorie labeling on consumer and restaurant behavior is mixed. This paper examined: (1) consumer responses to calorie information alone or compared to modified calorie information and (2) changes in restaurant offerings following or in advance of menu labeling implementation. METHODS: Searches were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Policy File, and PAIS International to identify restaurant calorie labeling studies through October 1, 2016, that measured calories ordered, consumed, or available for purchase on restaurant menus. The reference lists of calorie labeling articles were also searched. RESULTS: Fifty-three studies were included: 18 in real-world restaurants, 9 in cafeterias, and 21 in laboratory or simulation settings. Five examined restaurant offerings. CONCLUSIONS: Because of a lack of well-powered studies with strong designs, the degree to which menu labeling encourages lower-calorie purchases and whether that translates to a healthier population are unclear. Although there is limited evidence that menu labeling affects calories purchased at fast-food restaurants, some evidence demonstrates that it lowers calories purchased at certain types of restaurants and in cafeteria settings. The limited data on modified calorie labels find that such labels can encourage lower-calorie purchases but may not differ in effects relative to calorie labels alone.