4.6 Article

Availability of nutrition information from chain restaurants in the United States

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE
卷 30, 期 3, 页码 266-268

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2005.10.006

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Although obesity and poor dietary habits are complex multifactorial problems, away-from-home food has been identified as one likely and important contributor. Restaurants provide a growing and substantial portion of the average American's diet, yet the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA), which went into effect in 1994, explicitly exempts restaurants front most labeling requirements. Thus, this study examined the availability of nutrition information from the largest chain restaurants in the United States. Methods: Between January and August 2004, we surveyed the 300 largest chain restaurants by telephone, e-mail, or examining company websites (response rate was 96%). The top chains, as ranked by revenue, were selected based on 2002 ratings in Restaurants and Institutions. Results: Fifty-four percent of the 287 largest chain restaurants made some nutrition information available. Forty-four percent had nutrition information for the majority of their standard menu items. We found no significant differences in the availability of nutrition information based on the size of the restaurant chain. Of those restaurants with nutrition information, 86% provided information on the company website. Conclusions: The number of restaurants providing nutrition information has increased over the last 10 years. However, making informed and healthful food choices is hampered by the absence of nutrition information at many restaurants. Given the growing and significant role that away4rom-home foods play in Americans' diets, the Surgeon General and the National Academies' Institute of Medicine recommend that nutrition information be available to customers at restaurants, and state legislatures and the U.S. Congress are beginning to address the issue.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据