Skip to main content

Table 2 Sales (mean ± SE) of meals removed by the food vendor before kJ labelling compared with the replacement meals over the 10-week period for each, as a percentage of total sales

From: The Effect of Energy Labelling on Menus and a Social Marketing Campaign on Food-Purchasing Behaviours of University Students

No kJ labelling and social marketing campaign kJ labelling and social marketing campaign Difference P value
Food removed from menu Energy (kJ) Mean ± SE Foods added to menu Energy (kJ) Mean ± SE
Japanese Chicken Burger 2340 24.3 ± 0.27 Chicken, Avocado, Salsa Wrap 2300 33.3 ± 0.36 9.06 0.00a
Falafel Burger 2734 17.9 ± 0.12 Falafel Wrap 2930 13.6 ± 0.14 −4.36 0.02b
Grilled Fish and Chips 2580 14 ± 0.13 Grilled Salmon 3800 12.9 ± 0.16 −1.16 0.02b
Mushroom and Bacon risotto 2488 7.2 ± 0.12 Pumpkin Risotto 1550 28 ± 0.22 20.86 0.00a
Caesar Salad 1972 9.2 ± 0.10 Coconut, Coriander & Quinoa Salad 2100 4.1 ± 0.04 −5.17 0.36
Honey Soy Chicken Salad 3080 13.2 ± 0.13 Glass Noodle Asian Salad 2100 5.4 ± 0.05 −7.81 0.41
Salmon Teriyaki Salad 2868 14.2 ± 0.13 Kale & Quinoa Salad 2100 2.8 ± 0.04 −11.42 0.20
  1. Difference represents the change in percentage of sales of foods over the 10 weeks of kJ labelling and social marketing period compared with the corresponding 10 weeks the year before
  2. aSignificant increase in sales of new labelled items (added post nutritional analysis and pre intervention) compared to previous unlabelled counterparts. P < 0.05
  3. bSignificant decrease in sales of new labelled items (added post nutritional analysis and pre intervention) compared to previous unlabelled counterparts. P < 0.05
  4. Analysis to determine significance between intervention and comparative week’s periods performed using Mann–Whitney U test for non-normally distributed data