Increasing availability of lower energy meals vs. energy labelling in virtual full-service restaurants: two randomized controlled trials in participants of higher and lower socioeconomic position

Marty, Lucile; Reed, Sasha M.; Jones, Andrew J.; Robinson, Eric

doi:10.1186/s12889-021-11007-0

Table 2 Fixed effect statistics of complete and stratified linear mixed models with participant and menu effect as random, dependant variable: energy of the main

From: Increasing availability of lower energy meals vs. energy labelling in virtual full-service restaurants: two randomized controlled trials in participants of higher and lower socioeconomic position

	Study 1
	Type III tests		*Estimate*^a	*95% LCL*	*95% UCL*
Model	F	p	*Estimate*^a	*95% LCL*	*95% UCL*
Complete (n = 1001)
(Intercept)			962.20	850.71	1073.68
Availability	256.43	< 0.001	− 128.41	− 153.81	− 103.01
Labelling	9.25	0.002	−3.53	−28.93	21.87
Education	1.62	0.203	11.00	−16.34	38.33
Availability*Education	< 0.01	0.968	−0.64	−32.16	30.88
Labelling*Education	6.78	0.009	−41.85	−73.37	−10.33
Education = ‘low’ (n = 351)
(Intercept)			962.20	849.06	1075.33
Availability	105.86	< 0.001	−128.41	− 152.89	−103.93
Labelling	0.08	0.778	−3.53	−28.01	20.95
Education = ‘high’ (n = 650)
(Intercept)			973.19	864.55	1081.84
Availability	176.88	< 0.001	−129.05	− 148.08	− 110.03
Labelling	21.87	< 0.001	−45.38	−64.40	−26.35
	Study 2
	Type III tests		*Estimate*	*95% LCL*	*95% UCL*
Model	F	p	*Estimate*	*95% LCL*	*95% UCL*
Complete (n = 1090)
(Intercept)			957.16	917.50	996.83
Availability	243.80	< 0.001	− 115.16	− 140.67	−89.66
Labelling	7.24	0.007	−6.33	−31.90	19.23
Education	2.08	0.149	15.20	−12.12	42.52
Availability*Education	1.98	0.160	−22.80	−54.58	8.98
Labelling*Education	3.65	0.056	−31.03	−62.87	0.81
Education = ‘low’ (n = 388)
(Intercept)			957.16	923.58	990.74
Availability	82.46	< 0.001	−115.16	−140.04	−90.29
Labelling	0.25	0.619	−6.33	−31.26	18.60
Education = ‘high’ (n = 702)
(Intercept)			972.36	933.28	1011.44
Availability	198.04	< 0.001	− 137.96	− 157.18	− 118.74
Labelling	14.51	< 0.001	−37.36	−56.59	−18.13
	Pooled data
	Type III tests		*Estimate*	*95% LCL*	*95% UCL*
Model	F	p	*Estimate*	*95% LCL*	*95% UCL*
Complete (n = 2091)
(Intercept)			967.55	901.39	1033.71
Availability	498.83	< 0.001	− 121.44	−139.44	− 103.43
Labelling	16.49	< 0.001	−5.11	−23.13	12.90
Education	3.72	0.054	13.16	−6.17	32.48
Availability*Education	1.14	0.285	−12.20	−34.59	10.19
Labelling*Education	10.01	0.002	−36.16	−58.56	−13.76
Study	7.61	0.006	−19.81	−33.89	−5.73
Education = ‘low’ (n = 739)
(Intercept)			970.70	903.09	1038.31
Availability	185.94	< 0.001	−121.44	−138.90	−103.98
Labelling	0.32	0.570	−5.07	−22.56	12.41
Study	4.08	0.044	−23.63	−46.57	−0.69
Education = ‘high’ (n = 1352)
(Intercept)			978.65	914.01	1043.29
Availability	374.97	< 0.001	− 133.64	− 147.16	− 120.11
Labelling	35.74	< 0.001	−41.27	−54.80	−27.73
Study	3.57	0.059	−17.06	−34.76	0.64

^aIntercept estimate for the reference group: baseline availability, no labelling, low education level (complete models), study 1 (pooled data); estimates of the fixed effects must be interpreted as differences with the reference group

Back to article page

ISSN: 1471-2458

Contact us

Submission enquiries: bmcpublichealth@biomedcentral.com
General enquiries: ORSupport@springernature.com

BMC Public Health

Contact us