Comparison of Sales From Vending Machines With 4 Different Food and Beverage Messages

Key Points Question What was the relative effectiveness of 4 food and beverage messages on vending machine sales and calories purchased? Findings In this randomized trial of 267 vending machines, machines labeled with physical activity calorie equivalents or traffic lights had significantly lower sales of unhealthy beverages (34% and 30%, respectively) compared with machines with beverage tax posters. Traffic lights compared with physical activity labels significantly decreased total calories purchased among 1065 customers (147 vs 178 kcal). Meaning Traffic light and physical activity calorie equivalent labels encouraged healthier beverage, but not snack, purchases compared with a poster about a beverage tax.

A2. Example labels and posters in the field

A3. Nutrition categorization
Item labels were created based on nutrition information gathered by research assistants from brand websites.

Beverage guidelines
For the green only and traffic light conditions, beverage nutrition classification was based on the guidelines in "Rethink Your Drink" from Building a Healthier Boston's Healthy Drink Toolkit.Beverages with 0-5 grams of sugar per 12 oz were labeled as most healthy or green (e.g., water, seltzer).Beverages with 6-12 grams of sugar per 12 oz or artificial sweeteners were labeled as moderately healthy or yellow (e.g., diet soda, 100% fruit juice).Beverages with over 12 grams of sugar per 12 oz were labeled as unhealthy or red (e.g., sodas and juice drinks with added sugar).Therefore, every beverage labeled red and nearly4 every beverage labeled yellow were subject to the Philadelphia sweetened beverage tax.Of the unique beverages available in each machine during the study, 28% were labeled green, 39% were labeled yellow, and 33% were labeled red.

Snack guidelines
Snack nutrition classification was based on calories, total fat, saturated fat, sugar, and whether or not ingredients included nuts, seeds, or fruit as in Franckle et al, 2018. 5Snacks with fewer calories, less fat, and sugar were labeled as green, those with moderate levels were labeled as yellow, and those with the most calories, fat and sugar were labeled as red (see below).Nuts, seeds, and fruits without added sugar were allowed to have higher levels of fat and sugar, as long as the calories matched that category.All gums and mints were set to yellow even though they met the criteria for green because they have no nutritional value (no fiber, protein, or vitamins).
Of the unique snacks available in each machine during the study, 47% were labeled green, 37% were labeled yellow, and 16% were labeled red.

A4. Physical activity equivalent calculations
In contrast to the two healthfulness conditions (green only and traffic light), the physical activity labels were based solely on product calories.Physical activity equivalent labels translated calories into the number of minutes of brisk walking required for a person weighing 150 pounds to "work off" those calories.Calculations started with assessing the increase in Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR) for brisk walking (3.2) over sitting or watching TV (1.2) = 2.These values are from the physical activity levels in the WHO/FAO report (Annex 5).
Minutes = Calories * 24 hours * 60 minutes (BMR slope (14.9375) * Weight (68 kg) + Intercept (589.40))* Walking increase (2) All gums and mints were set to 5 minutes of physical activity because we did not expect someone to eat the whole package at once.Of the unique beverages available in each machine during the study, the median physical activity equivalent was 0 minutes.Among those beverages with physical activity equivalents > 0 minutes, the mean was 67 minutes (SD=33, median = 67, range = 4-135).Of the unique snacks available in each machine during the study, the mean physical activity equivalent was 74 minutes (SD=43, median = 63, range = 5-235).eAppendix 2. Sales Data B1.Data excluded from vending machine analyses Data were first pooled across intervention arms to conduct quality checks.We excluded an outlier month of sales from one beverage machine at baseline and another month during the intervention with more than 1.5 times the number of items sold relative to the next highest month.
In addition, only 158 entries were dropped because they were listed as "unknown" (<1% of the 1.1M items sold), making it impossible to link them with nutrition information.

B2. Location balance tests
We expected different customer behavior at different types of locations and at machines with historically low versus high sales.People go to those locations for very different purposes and spend different amounts of time there.Therefore, we stratified by location type and baseline sales.The number of vending machine locations and the two stratification factors (location type and machine baseline sales) did not significantly differ across conditions in the analytic sample at baseline.

B5. Sensitivity 1: Dropping cumulative data
We conducted two sensitivity analyses.First, eleven beverage and five snack machines had large spikes in sales during a month that occurred after one or more months when the machine had zero sales.The company could not explain these data points and we were concerned that they were not actual spikes in monthly sales, but rather the cumulative sum of that month and the previous months posting zero sales.Therefore, our first sensitivity analysis dropped these outlier months and the preceding months with zero sales.

Has calories
Pred. margins Calories, if calories Pred.margins Note.These sensitivity models drop products and machines that did not receive the treatment with fidelity.Calories: n beverages=247,844 clustered on 104 locations, of which n=126,388 had calories; n snacks=352,445, clustered on 90 locations where there were sales.Overall predictive margins for calories from non-caloric and caloric beverages: Beverage tax=92.5, Green only=90.2,Traffic light=86.8,Physical activity=86.3.Product healthfulness, sales in locations where unhealthy (red) items were available: n beverages=241,308 clustered on 100 locations; n snacks=338,162 clustered on 86 locations.Covariates in all models included: time (categorical month) and several baseline machine-level characteristics: average corresponding outcome across previous 9 months, average number of unique red items available, beverages smaller than 20oz ever available (beverage analyses only), binary sales (high/low), 4 dummies for 5 location types, and the sales x location type interaction.Bold indicates significant differences.Superscripts indicate either which conditions differ or which conditions differ in the contrast of %R(ed)=% unhealthy versus either %G(reen)=% healthy or %Y(ellow)=% moderately healthy, using Bonferroni-Holm adjustment: (Beverage tax=a, Green only=b, Covariates in all models included: several baseline machine-level characteristics: average corresponding outcome across previous 9 months, average number of unique red items available, beverages smaller than 20oz ever available (beverage analyses only), binary sales (high/low), 4 dummies for 5 location types, and the sales x location type interaction.Bold indicates significant differences.None of the 6 pairwise contrasts for "Calories, if calories" were significant.* p<.05, ** p<.01

B8. Secondary Analysis 2: Machine-level monthly dollar sales
The second set of secondary analyses tested machine-level sales in dollars for beverages and snacks.Covariates in all models included: time (categorical month) and several baseline machine-level characteristics: average corresponding outcome across previous 9 months, average number of unique red items available, binary sales (high/low), 4 dummies for 5 location types, and the sales x location type interaction.Bold indicates significant differences.Super-scripts indicate which conditions differ, using Bonferroni-Holm adjustment: (Beverage tax=a, Green only=b, Traffic light=c, Physical activity=d); Ref=Reference group; * p<.05, ** p<.01 eAppendix 3.Customer Purchase Assessments

C1. Purchase assessment procedures
The original sample size for purchase assessments was determined by the number of individuals required to detect an interaction of education level (2-levels) and labeling strategy (4-levels) on average calories per item purchased, separately for snack and beverage machines (2-levels).Assuming equal numbers of higher and lower educated individuals within labeling intervention, an effective sample size of 176 participants per high and low education groups within, for example, the Green only condition provide 80% power to detect a difference of 0.3 standard deviation units under the null hypothesis of a difference of 0 using a two-sided Student's t-test and two-sided alpha level of 0.05.A difference of 0.3 SD units amounts to 7-17 calories based on prior estimates of the standard deviation of calories per vending machine purchase. 6To account for clustering of individuals by vending machine, we increased our target sample size by a factor of 1.05 to 185 based on an intraclass correlation of 0.01 and 6 purchasers per snack machine.That target would be reached by surveying 6 individuals each at 33 snack machines, resulting in 198 individuals per label condition and education status, and 1,584 individuals overall.For beverage machines we performed a similar calculation, resulting in 5 participants needed per machine across 38 machines per education status and label condition for a total of 1,520 participants across all levels of message conditions and education status to detect an interaction of the same magnitude.To account for potential missing data and incomplete surveys, we aimed to recruit just over 200 additional individuals for a total of 3,312 participants.
During data collection, our aim was to get 10 purchase assessments from every machine in the study to which we had access.During the entire study, 17 research assistants (RAs) participated in purchase assessments.Their data collection shifts were distributed to get assessments from all machines over the course of the intervention period.We tried to make sure each location was visited at least once a month, but prioritized locations without any purchase assessments over locations that already had many.RAs were posted near machines on weekdays, primarily in the morning, at lunch, and in the late afternoon.If no one was intercepted during those times at high yield machines, we tried alternate times of day (earlier in the morning, or later in the evening).
After adult customers completed their vending purchases, they were approached by study RAs who asked if they would be interested in completing a short survey about their purchase.If they were willing, the RA read the survey questions from their tablet and filled in the answers in Qualtrics.RAs were trained in group sessions where they practiced doing surveys with one another, and then were observed in the field during their first few shifts.
Customers could only participate in this study once.We had the full list of products available from the vendors.Therefore, the survey asked for the specific items they purchased.We used the nutrition facts from the brand website for each item to calculate calories and traffic light labeling for every product they purchased.After documenting their purchases, the survey asked about the intervention, whether it influenced their purchasing, and finally for their demographics.Participants who were not City employees were eligible for a small prize in exchange for completing the survey (city employees are not permitted to accept such prizes).
We documented 604 refusals and 164 repeat customers.Thus, we approached people a total of 1,833 times and had a 67% response rate (33% refusals).Of those who responded, 13% were excluded because they were repeat customers.

C2. Covariate differences in purchase assessments vs sales analyses
For analyses of purchase assessments, first, there were only four location types because assessments were not done at court/office locations.Second, time was aggregated to quarters to reduce the number of parameters estimated with this smaller sample size.Third, because this analysis looks at beverage and snack outcomes combined, we adjusted for the sum of beverage and snack average calories sold and average total number of unique unhealthy items at baseline.And fourth, we did not adjust for whether small beverage sizes (< 20 oz) were ever available during baseline because that measure did not apply for snack-only purchase assessments or locations with snack-only machines.[-30.75, 26.64] 177.9 c -4.36 [-33.00, 24.28] 177.3 c 2.77 [-23.30, 28.83] 177.1 c Note.Outcome is sum of all beverage and snack calories sold per trip.N=1,010, clustered on 90 locations.The significant contrast between Traffic light and Physical Activity in the main analysis is -30.46 [-49.36, -11.56].Sensitivity 2 model drops products and machines that did not receive the treatment with fidelity: n=997, clustered on 88 locations.The significant contrast between Traffic light and Physical Activity in Sensitivity 2 is -29.85 [-48.81, -10.].Sensitivity 3 model drops one participant outlier who bought 7 fig bars on one trip: n=1009, clustered on 90 locations.The significant contrast between Traffic light and Physical Activity in Sensitivity 3 is -29.45 [-48.84, -10.05].Purchase assessments were not permitted in the court/office locations and not conducted at correctional facilities with low traffic because a prison escort was required.Covariates included: time (categorical quarter), 5 baseline machine-level characteristics: average number of unique red items available, binary sales (high/low), 3 dummies for 4 location types, their interaction, and baseline levels of calories at the monthly level, and 3 binary participant characteristics: white, college or more education, and work for the city.Bold indicates significant differences.Super-scripts indicate which conditions differ, using Bonferroni-Holm adjustment: (Beverage tax=a, Green only=b, Traffic light=c, Physical activity=d), Pred.margins = Predictive margins, *p<.05, **p<.01

C4. Moderation by education
An original aim of this study was to examine the degree to which education moderated our intervention effects, but the Covid-19 pandemic prevented us from reaching our target sample size.Because nutrition labeling systems can further health inequities if they are not easily understood by all groups, 7,8 we still explored education as a moderator.Moderation was tested by adding the interaction of education and condition and evaluating the joint significance of the interaction terms.
There was no significant moderation by education on effects of condition on total calories (interaction term: Chi 2 (3) = 0.55, p=.91).[-19.28, 38.75] 177.4 c Note.These subgroup analyses compare calories purchased among those with lower or higher amounts of education.Although there were differences in significance levels, the lack of significant moderation shows that estimates for lower and higher education are not significantly different from each other.Lower education: N=466, clustered on 87 locations.Higher education: N=544, clustered on 80 locations.Outcome is sum of all beverage and snack calories sold per trip.Covariates in all models included: time (categorical quarter), 5 baseline machine-level characteristics: average number of unique items available, binary sales (high/low), their interaction, 3 dummies for 4 location types, and baseline levels of outcomes at the monthly level, and 2 binary participant characteristics: white and work for the city.Bold indicates significant differences.Super-scripts indicate which conditions differ, using Bonferroni-Holm adjustment: (Beverage tax=a, Green only=b, Traffic light=c, Physical activity=d) *p<.05, **p<.01The next few questions will be about calorie labels.The vendors are required by law to display calorie labels next to products in the vending machines if it's not displayed on the front of the package.Remember to check that you filled in all the information correctly (e.g.snack sizes, prices, etc).If you used a filler for sizes, please be sure to go back and fix it.

End of Block: Reminder for RAs
tax.The beverage poster was developed by the City of Philadelphia.We adapted it to make the snack poster.light.These were based on the labels and posters from Thorndike and colleagues.AN, Riis J, Sonnenberg LM, Levy DE.Traffic-light labels and choice architecture: promoting healthy food choices.Am J Prev Med.2014;46(2):143-149.4.Physical activity.These were based on the labels and posters from Bleich and colleagues.SN, Herring BJ, Flagg DD, Gary-Webb TL.Reduction in purchases of sugar-sweetened beverages among low-income Black adolescents after exposure to caloric information.Am J Public Health.2012;102(2):329-335.

o
Other (27) Display This Question: If Loop current: Name of other snack item: = Other And Have you done this survey before?= No Q12 If other, what snack was purchased?____________________________________________________ Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q13 Size (only write number; participant can look at product to check) ____________________________________________________ Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q14 Was the size in grams or ounces?o Grams (1) o Ounces (2) Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q15 Price of item (do not put $ sign): ____________________________________________________ Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q16 How healthy do you think this item is (RA points to item participant purchased): o 1: Not at all healthy (1) o 2: Slightly unhealthy (2) o 3: Neither healthy nor unhealthy (3) o 4: Slightly healthy (4) o 5: Very healthy (5) End of Block: Snack questions Start of Block: Beverage items purchased © 2024 Gibson LA et al.JAMA Network Open.Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q17 Number of beverage items purchased: ▼ 0 (1) ... 7+ (8) End of Block: Beverage items purchased Start of Block: Beverage questions Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q18 Type of beverage item: o Soda (1) o Diet Soda (2) o Tea/Diet Tea (3) o Water/Seltzer (4) o Other (5) Display This Question: If Loop current: Type of beverage item: = Soda Q19 Name of soda beverage item:

___________________________________________________ © 2024 o
Gibson LA et al.JAMA Network Open.Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q25 Size of beverage: ▼ 10 oz (1) ... 20 oz (4) Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q26 Price of item (do not include $ sign) ____________________________________________________ Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q27 How healthy do you think this item is (RA should indicate item participant purchased) on a scale of 1 -5? o 1: Not at all healthy (1) o 2: Slightly unhealthy (2) o 3: Neither healthy nor unhealthy (6) o 4: Slightly healthy (4) o 5: Very healthy (7) End of Block: Beverage questions Start of Block: Vending machine visit frequency questions Display This Question: If Number of snack items purchased: != 0 And Have you done this survey before?= No Q28 How often do you buy snacks from this vending machine?o < 1 time per month or fewer (1) o 2-3 times per month (2) o 1-2 times per week (3) o 3-6 times per week (4) o 1 time per day (5) o 2-3 times per day (6) o 4+ times per day (7) o Don't know (8) o Refused (9) o Not applicable (10) © 2024 Gibson LA et al.JAMA Network Open.Display This Question: If Number of beverage items purchased: != 0 And Have you done this survey before?= NoQ29 How often do you buy beverages from this vending machine?o < 1 time per month or fewer (1) o 2-3 times per month (2) o 1-2 times per week (3) o 3-6 times per week (4) o 1 time per day (5) o 2-3 times per day (6) o 4+ times per day (7) o Don't know (8) o Refused (9) o Not applicable (10) Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q30 How often do you buy items from vending machines in general?o < 1 time per month or fewer (1) o 2-3 times per month (2) o 1-2 times per week (3) o 3-6 times per week (4) o 1 time per day (5) o 2-3 times per day (6) o 4+ times per day (7) o Don't know (8) o Refused (9) Q31 Which vending machine do you usually go to in this building?This one (1) o Another one (2) o Refused (3) Skip To: End of Block If Which vending machine do you usually go to in this building?= This one Skip To: End of Block If Which vending machine do you usually go to in this building?= Refused Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q32 The vending machine you typically go to is located on which floor in this building?▼ Basement (1) ... 18th (20) Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q33 The vending machine you typically go to is located where on the floor in this building?o Hallway (1) o Gathering space with eating/food (e.g.staff dining room, café, breakroom with appliances, kitchen) (2) o Gathering space without food (e.g.lobby, roll call, visitor's lounge) (3) o In a vending machine specific room/nook (nothing else in the vicinity) (5) o Other (8) o Refused (9) Display This Question: If The vending machine you typically go to is located where on the floor in this building?= OtherQ34 If other, how would you describe the location of the vending machines?___________________________________________________ End of Block: Vending machine visit frequency questions Start of Block: Questions about posters and labels © 2024 Gibson LA et al.JAMA Network Open.Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q35 RAs: For this next set of questions, participants should not be able to see posters/labels.These questions are meant to test their recall of the posters/labels.Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q36 Did you notice any posters or labels displayed on the machines?By "posters" we mean large stickers on the machine, and by "labels" we mean small stickers next to products.o Yes (1) o No (2) o Don't know (3) o Refused (4) Skip To: Q44 If Did you notice any posters or labels displayed on the machines?!= Yes Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q37 Did any of the posters or labels convey information about the health or nutritional content of the food/beverage?o Yes (1) o No (2) o Don't know (3) o Refused (4) Skip To: Q40 If Did any of the posters or labels convey information about the health or nutritional content of th... != Yes Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q38 Please describe what the posters said.(RAs: Do not show options to participants.Participant answers © 2024 Gibson LA et al.JAMA Network Open.do not have to align precisely with choices, so long as general idea is the same) o Healthy Snack Guide/Green labels (1) o Healthy Snack Guide/Traffic lights (6) o Physical activity markers (2) o Beverage tax information (3) o None of the above (4) o Refused (7) Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q39 Please describe what the labels said.(RAs: Do not show options to participants.Participant answers do not have to align precisely with choices, so long as general idea is the same.)o Green labels (4) o Traffic light colors/Emojis (7) o Physical activity times (5) o None of the above (6) o Refused (8) Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q40 Did you notice any posters about the Philadelphia beverage tax? (If participant is unfamiliar, you can explain it is a 1.5 cent per ounce tax on sugar-sweetened and artificially-sweetened beverages.)o Yes (1) o No (2) o Don't know (3) o Refused (4) © 2024 Gibson LA et al.JAMA Network Open.Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q41 Did the posters or labels influence what you purchased?o Yes (1) o No (2) o Did not see them (3) o Don't know (4) o Refused (5) Display This Question: If Did the posters or labels influence what you purchased?= Yes Q42 To what extent did you use any of the health posters or labels on the machine to help you decide what to buy? o 1: Not at all (1) o 2: A little (2) o 3: Somewhat (3) o 4: A lot (7) o Refused (8) Display This Question: If Did the posters or labels influence what you purchased?= Yes Q43 Did these posters or labels make you more or less likely to buy items from the vending machines?o 1: Much less likely (1) o 2: Less likely (2) o 3: Neither more nor less likely (3) o 4: More likely (4) o 5: Much more likely (5) o Refused (6) Page Break Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q44 RAs: Now you can point out the labels and posters on the machine.© 2024 Gibson LA et al.JAMA Network Open.Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q45 How much did you trust the information on the posters and labels we have been talking about that are displayed on the vending machine?o 1: Completely distrusted (1) o 2: Somewhat distrusted (2) o 3: Neither trusted nor distrusted (3) o 4: Somewhat trusted (4) o 5: Completely trusted (5) o Refused (6) Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q46 Have you seen these posters/labels on other vending machines?o Yes (1) o No (2) o Don't know (3) o Refused (4) Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q47 Knowing that the City posted these posters and labels on the vending machine, to what extent do you think the City is trying to help improve your health?o 1: Not at all (1) o 2: A little (2) o 3: Somewhat (3) o 4: A lot (4) o Refused (7) © 2024 Gibson LA et al.JAMA Network Open.Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q48 Knowing that the City posted these posters and labels on the vending machine, to what extent do you find these messages annoying?o 1: Not at all annoying (1) o 2: A little annoying (2) o 3: Somewhat annoying (3) o 4: Very annoying (4) o Refused (6) End of Block: Questions about posters and labels Start of Block: Calorie labels Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q49 RAs, read out loud:

55, 0.89] 72.3 a
Note.These sensitivity models drop potentially cumulative data.Calories: n beverages=252,133 clustered on 106 locations, of which n=128,876 had calories; n snacks=368,844, clustered on 93 locations where there were sales.Overall predictive margins for calories from non-caloric and caloric beverages: Beverage tax=93.3,Green only=91.6,Traffic light=86.6,Physical activity=86.7.Product healthfulness, sales in locations where unhealthy (red) items were available: n beverages=245,597 clustered on 102 locations; n snacks=354,148 clustered on 89 locations.Covariates in all models included: time (categorical month) and several baseline machinelevel characteristics: average corresponding outcome across previous 9 months, average number of unique red items available, beverages smaller than 20oz ever available (beverage analyses only), binary sales (high/low), 4 dummies for 5 location types, and the sales x location type interaction.Bold indicates significant differences.Super-scripts indicate either which conditions differ or which

53, 0.90] 72.1 a
The first set of secondary analyses tested moderation of the intervention for all machine-level and transaction-level beverage and snack models by study time-period (first 3 months to the last 10 months).Time (categorical month) was dropped from all models to accommodate this moderation.
Traffic light=c, Physical activity=d); Pred.margins = Predictive margins; Ref=Reference group; * p<.05, ** p<.01 © 2024 Gibson LA et al.JAMA Network Open.Note.These sensitivity models drop potentially cumulative data.Total quantity sold: n beverage machines=1,781 clustered on 105 locations; n snack machines=1,427 clustered on 96 locations.Monthly machine-level calories and quantity colors sold: n beverage machines=1,742 clustered on 104 locations; n snack machines=1,362 clustered on 93 locations.Covariates in all models included: time (categorical month) and several baseline machine-level characteristics: average corresponding outcome across previous 9 months, average number of unique red items available, beverages smaller than 20oz ever available (beverage analyses only), binary sales (high/low), 4 dummies for 5 location types, and the sales x location type interaction.Bold indicates significant differences.Super-scripts indicate which conditions differ, using Bonferroni-Holm adjustment: (Beverage tax=a, Green only=b, Traffic light=c,©2024 Gibson LA et al.JAMA Network Open.Physical activity=d); Green=healthy, Yellow=moderately healthy, Red=unhealthy; Pred.margins = Predictive margins; Ref=Reference group; *p<.05, **p<.01B7.Secondary Analysis 1: 1-3 months vs 4-13 months Monthly machine-level sales in dollars: n beverage machines=1,817 clustered on 107 locations; n snack machines=1,411 clustered on 96 locations.Sensitivity 1 drops products and machines that did not receive the treatment with fidelity: n beverage machines=1,759 clustered on 106 locations; n snack machines=1,395 clustered on 96 locations.Sensitivity 2 drops potentially cumulative data: n beverage machines=1,742 clustered on 104 locations; n snack machines=1,362 clustered on 93 locations.

End of Block: Snack items purchased Start of Block: Snack questions
© 2024 Gibson LA et al.JAMA Network Open.© 2024 Gibson LA et al.JAMA Network Open.© 2024 Gibson LA et al.JAMA Network Open.© 2024 Gibson LA et al.JAMA Network Open.

End of Block: Calorie labels Start of Block: Demographics
Skip To: End of Block If Did you see any calorie labels on or near the vending machine products?= No © 2024 Gibson LA et al.JAMA Network Open.If Have you done this survey before?= No Q59 What is the combined annual income of the adults (i.e., you and your partner if applicable) in your household before taxes?o Less than $25,000 (1) o $25,001-$50,000 (2) o $50,001-$75,000 (3) o $75,001-$100,000 (4) o $100,001-$125,000 (5) o $125,001-$150,000 (6) o More than $150,000 (7) o Refused (8) © 2024 Gibson LA et al.JAMA Network Open.© 2024 Gibson LA et al.JAMA Network Open.© 2024 Gibson LA et al.JAMA Network Open.Display This Question: If Have you done this survey before?= No Q62 Do you work for the City in any way (e.g., Civil servant, contractor, staff, elected official, etc.)?RAs:

if you are in a city employee only area, cannot give city employees item/prize.
© 2024 Gibson LA et al.JAMA Network Open.