Skip to main content

Table 1 Participants’ characteristics

From: Socioeconomic position and the impact of increasing availability of lower energy meals vs. menu energy labelling on food choice: two randomized controlled trials in a virtual fast-food restaurant

 

Study 1a

(n = 868)

Study 2b

(n = 875)

Age, years, mean (SD)

35.5 (13.4)

36.1 (12.0)

Gender, female, n (%)

419 (48.27)

463 (52.91)

Ethnicity, n (%)

 White

789 (90.90)

801 (91.54)

BMI, kg/m2, mean (SD)

26.5 (5.78)

27.1 (5.98)

 Missing, implausiblec, n (%)

16 (1.84)

16 (1.83)

Highest educational level, n (%)

 No qualification

17 (1.96)

15 (1.71)

 1–3 GCSEs

62 (7.14)

52 (5.94)

 4+ GCSEs

144 (16.59)

119 (13.60)

 A level

243 (28.00)

286 (32.69)

 Higher education or Bachelor’s degree

311 (35.83)

330 (37.72)

 Post-Graduate degree

91 (10.48)

73 (8.34)

Years of higher education, mean (SD)

3.17 (2.63)

3.16 (2.52)

Equivalised income, £, mean (SD)

19,652 (26561)

20,296 (15139)

Subjective socioeconomic status, mean (SD)

4.99 (1.62)

4.95 (1.53)

Student, yes, n (%)

217 (25.00)

32 (3.66)

Fast-food consumption frequency, n (%)

 Less than once per month

259 (29.84)

247 (28.23)

 1–3 times per month

436 (50.23)

456 (52.46)

 1 time per week or more

173 (19.93)

169 (19.31)

Dieting status, yes, n (%)

119 (13.71)

121 (13.83)

  1. aSee Additional file 1: Section 5 – Table S4 for study 1 detailed participants’ characteristics. bSee Additional file 1: Section 5 – Table S5 for study 2 detailed participants’ characteristics. cBMI implausible values: BMI > 10 or BMI < 60 [58]