Objectives: This study aimed to assess the nutritional quality of food products marketed at children, with and without nutrient claims, using two different approaches.
Methods: Analyses were performed based on a data set with food composition and labelling data from every packaged food marketed at children sold in a major Brazilian supermarket (n=535). Foods were classified as 'healthier' and 'less healthy' according to the UK/Ofcom nutrient profile model and to the NOVA classification based on the level of food processing. Pearson's χ2 test was used to compare proportions between models. Agreement was assessed using Cohen's κ-statistic (P<0.05).
Results: The NOVA model was stricter than the UK/Ofcom model, classifying more products as 'less healthy' (91.4%) compared with the nutrient profile-based model (75.0%; P<0.001). Agreement between models was 79.4% (k=0.30), because 72.9% (n=390) of products were categorised as 'less healthy' by both models, and 6.5% (n=35) as 'healthier'. Half of the food products marketed at children from the database (270; 50.5%) bore nutrient claims. From these products with nutrient claims, 95.9% (92.8-98.0) were classified as 'less healthy' by the NOVA model, whereas this percentage was 74.1% (68.4-79.2) according to the UK/Ofcom model (P<0.05).
Conclusions: The high number of foods with low nutritional quality being marketed at children via product packaging and nutrient claims should be of concern to policy makers wanting to improve children's diets and to tackle childhood obesity. The implementation of nutritional quality criteria to ensure that foods targeted at children should be eligible to bear nutrient claims on their labels could avoid a situation where claims mask the overall nutritional status of a food.