Behavior, EatingNCT07329452
Menu to Meal (M2M) Menu Labeling Intervention Study
A study testing Paper menu and Digital menu condition in people with Behavior, Eating, run by Texas A&M University at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
This study evaluates the impact of culturally tailored menu labeling interventions on psychosocial factors and ordering behavior among customers in two independently owned Hispanic restaurants in East-Central Texas. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Behavior, Eating
- What is being tested?
- Paper menu and Digital menu condition
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 242 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 17 Nov 2025to 18 May 2026
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Adults aged 18 years or older
- Patrons dining at participating Hispanic restaurants during designated study hours
- Able to read and speak English or Spanish
- Willing and able to provide informed consent
- Pregnant women are eligible to participate, as the study procedures pose minimal risk
Who cannot join
- Minors under 18 years of age
- Individuals with visual or cognitive impairments that prevent interaction with the menu formats or AR/AI technology
- Individuals who have participated in a prior phase of the study
- Restaurant staff involved in study implementation
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Menu to Meal (M2M): Evaluating the Effectiveness of a Digital Nutritional Labeling Intervention in Hispanic Restaurant Settings
This study evaluates the impact of culturally tailored menu labeling interventions on psychosocial factors and ordering behavior among customers in two independently owned Hispanic restaurants in East-Central Texas. Participants will be exposed to one of three sequential menu conditions at each restaurant: (1) a standard menu without nutrition information, (2) a paper menu with bilingual nutrition labels, or (3) a digital menu app enhanced with Augmented Reality (AR) and Artificial Intelligence (AI) providing interactive nutrition guidance. The study will assess whether menu formats influence nutrition literacy, decision-making confidence, self-efficacy, attitudes, behavioral intentions, and actual ordering behavior. Data will be collected through surveys, purchase receipts, and app interaction logs.
Read the detailed description
Detailed Description:
This study aims to design and evaluate a culturally tailored, bilingual menu labeling intervention incorporating AR and AI features in small, independently owned Hispanic restaurants. The intervention seeks to promote informed food ordering by targeting psychosocial constructs known to influence food choice. Three sequential conditions will be implemented: (1) baseline with standard menus and no nutrition labels, (2) paper menus with visible bilingual nutrition labels, and (3) a digital AR/AI-enhanced menu.
Guided by the Theory of Planned Behavior and Social Cognitive Theory, the study focuses on constructs such as decision-making confidence, self-efficacy, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. The two primary objectives are to (1) develop a culturally informed digital menu labeling tool and (2) evaluate its effectiveness compared with standard and paper menu formats in shaping psychosocial factors and actual ordering behavior.
Participants will be recruited during restaurant visits and exposed to the menu condition corresponding to their visit timing. Surveys will be administered before ordering to assess psychosocial factors, label awareness, and behavioral intentions. A formative needs assessment conducted prior to implementation will ensure cultural and linguistic appropriateness. Findings will provide evidence on the effectiveness of innovative, theory-informed digital interventions in promoting informed food choices in culturally specific restaurant settings not subject to federal nutrition labeling requirements.
- Conditions
- Behavior, Eating
- Being tested
- Paper menu, Digital menu condition
- Keywords
- nutrition labeling, menu labeling, Augmented reality (AR), Artificial intelligence (AI), Dietary behavior, Hispanic population, Chronic disease prevention, Obesity, Type 2 diabetes, Cardiovascular disease, Calorie intake, Sodium intake, Saturated fat, Food choice, Health disparities, Behavioral intervention, Digital health intervention, Restaurant nutrition, Health literacy, Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB)
- Medical subject headings
- Feeding Behavior, Obesity, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Cardiovascular Diseases
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Paper menuBehavioural
Paper menu with bilingual nutrition labels
Digital menu conditionBehavioural
AR/AI-enhanced digital menu giving interactive nutrition guidance
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Baseline condition | No intervention | Standard menu with no nutrition information. |
| Paper menu condition | Active comparator | Bilingual paper menus display numeric and icon-based nutrition information, including calories, saturated fat, and sodium. Receives: Behavioral: Paper menu |
| AR/AI digital menu condition | Experimental | Mobile app providing interactive nutrition information and personalized guidance based on dietary preferences. Receives: Behavioral: Digital menu condition |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Attitudes Toward Healthy Menu Choices
Attitudes toward selecting healthier menu items, assessed using a study-developed questionnaire informed by the Theory of Planned Behavior. The questionnaire consists of agreement-scale items evaluating whether choosing healthier foods is important, beneficial, and enjoyable.
Measurement Tool:
Study-developed Attitudes Toward Healthy Menu Choices Questionnaire (5-point agreement Likert scale)
Scale Description and Coding:
- = Strongly disagree
- = Disagree
- = Neither agree nor disagree
- = Agree
- = Strongly agree
Unit of Measure:
Mean attitude score (range: 1 to 5)
Scale Range and Direction:
Scores range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate more positive attitudes toward choosing healthier menu items.
Measured: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Intention to Make Healthier Food Choices
Intention to choose healthier menu items, assessed using a study-developed questionnaire informed by the Theory of Planned Behavior.
Measurement Tool:
Study-developed Healthy Eating Intention Questionnaire (5-point agreement Likert scale)
Scale Description and Coding:
- = Strongly disagree
- = Disagree
- = Neither agree nor disagree
- = Agree
- = Strongly agree
Unit of Measure:
Intention score (range: 1 to 5)
Scale Range and Direction:
Scores range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate stronger intention to choose healthier menu items.
Measured: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Perceived Behavioral Control Over Healthy Menu Choices
Perceived behavioral control over choosing healthier menu items, assessed using a study-developed questionnaire informed by the Theory of Planned Behavior.
Measurement Tool:
Study-developed Perceived Behavioral Control Questionnaire (5-point agreement Likert scale)
Scale Description and Coding:
- = Strongly disagree
- = Disagree
- = Neither agree nor disagree
- = Agree
- = Strongly agree
Unit of Measure:
Perceived behavioral control score (range: 1 to 5)
Scale Range and Direction:
Scores range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate greater perceived control over choosing healthier menu items.
Measured: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Self-Efficacy for Using Nutrition Information When Ordering
Self-efficacy for using nutrition information to guide food choices, assessed using a study-developed questionnaire informed by Social Cognitive Theory.
Measurement Tool:
Study-developed Nutrition Information Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (5-point agreement Likert scale)
Scale Description and Coding:
- = Strongly disagree
- = Disagree
- = Neither agree nor disagree
- = Agree
- = Strongly agree
Unit of Measure:
Mean self-efficacy score (range: 1 to 5)
Scale Range and Direction:
Scores range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate greater confidence in using nutrition information to make food choices.
Measured: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Awareness of Nutrition Information on the Menu
Awareness of nutrition information on the menu, assessed using a study-developed self-report item asking whether the participant noticed or looked at nutrition information while viewing the menu.
Measurement Tool:
Study-developed Awareness of Nutrition Information Item (binary response)
Scale Description and Coding:
0 = No, did not notice or look at nutrition information
1 = Yes, noticed or looked at nutrition information
Unit of Measure:
Percentage of participants reporting awareness (response = 1)
Scale Range and Direction:
Values range from 0 to 1. A value of 1 indicates awareness of nutrition information.
How the Percentage Is Derived:
The percentage is calculated as the proportion of participants with a response of 1 (Yes) among all participants who completed the questionnaire.
Measured: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Use of Nutrition Information to Inform Menu Selection
Use of nutrition information to inform menu selection, assessed using a study-developed self-report item asking the extent to which nutrition information influenced the participant's food choice.
Measurement Tool:
Study-developed Nutrition Information Influence Item (5-point Likert scale)
Scale Description and Coding:
- = Not at all
- = A little
- = Somewhat
- = Mostly
- = Completely
Unit of Measure:
Percentage of participants reporting use of nutrition information, defined as responses of 4 or 5
Scale Range and Direction:
Scores range from 1 to 5. Higher values indicate greater influence of nutrition information on choice.
How the Percentage Is Derived:
The percentage is calculated as the proportion of participants with responses of 4 or 5 among all participants who completed the questionnaire.
Measured: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Secondary outcomes (5)
Total Energy Ordered per Customer Order
Total energy content of menu items ordered by each participant, calculated using receipt-based ordering data linked to laboratory-tested and standardized recipe-based nutrient analysis conducted as part of the Menu2Meal (M2M) intervention.
Measurement Tool:
Receipt-based nutrient calculation using laboratory-tested and standardized nutrient databases
Unit of Measure:
Mean kilocalories (kcal) per customer order
Measured: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Saturated Fat Content of Menu Items Ordered
Total saturated fat content of menu items ordered by each participant, calculated by summing grams of saturated fat from all items ordered, using laboratory-tested and standardized recipe-based nutrient values.
Measurement Tool:
Receipt-based nutrient calculation using laboratory-tested and standardized nutrient databases
Unit of Measure:
Mean grams (g) of saturated fat per customer order
Measured: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Sodium Content of Menu Items Ordered
Total sodium content of menu items ordered by each participant, calculated by summing milligrams of sodium from all items ordered, using laboratory-tested and standardized recipe-based nutrient values.
Measurement Tool:
Receipt-based nutrient calculation using laboratory-tested and standardized nutrient databases
Unit of Measure:
Mean milligrams (mg) of sodium per customer order
Measured: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Dietary Fiber Content of Menu Items Ordered
Total dietary fiber content of menu items ordered by each participant, calculated by summing grams of dietary fiber from all items ordered, using laboratory-tested and standardized recipe-based nutrient values.
Measurement Tool:
Receipt-based nutrient calculation using laboratory-tested and standardized nutrient databases
Unit of Measure:
Mean grams (g) of dietary fiber per customer order
Measured: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Added Sugar Content of Menu Items Ordered
Total added sugar content of menu items ordered by each participant, calculated by summing grams of added sugars from all items ordered, using laboratory-tested and standardized recipe-based nutrient values.
Measurement Tool:
Receipt-based nutrient calculation using laboratory-tested and standardized nutrient databases
Unit of Measure:
Mean grams (g) of added sugars per customer order
Measured: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted9 Jan 2026
- Study start17 Nov 2025
- Primary completion18 May 2026
- Study completion18 May 2026
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Behavior, EatingStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- This study uses a within-site, quasi-experimental design at two independently owned Hispanic restaurants. The intervention consists of three sequential conditions: (1) a baseline phase with the standard menu, (2) a paper menu phase featuring bilingual nutrition labels, and (3) a digital menu phase using a mobile app enhanced with augmented reality (AR) and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. Each condition enrolls distinct participants to compare the effects of different menu labeling formats on ordering behavior and psychosocial outcomes. The restaurants serve as their own controls, allowing for direct comparison of menu formats within the same real-world setting.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 242 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Texas A&M University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Hyunjung Lee, Texas A&M University
- Investigators
- Hyunjung Lee, PhD, Principal investigator, Department of Nutrition, Texas A&M University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07329452
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- STUDY2025-1204
- Status last verified
- Jan 2026
- First submitted
- 24 Nov 2025
- Last updated
- 9 Jul 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: De-identified individual participant data (IPD) underlying the results reported in the publication will be shared, including baseline characteristics, outcome measures, and adverse event data. Data will be available beginning 6 months after publication for researchers who provide a methodologically sound proposal. Requests should be submitted to the corresponding author and will require a data use agreement in accordance with institutional and regulatory policies.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 9 Jul 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Menu to Meal (M2M): Evaluating the Effectiveness of a Digital Nutritional Labeling Intervention in Hispanic Restaurant Settings
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07329452
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- STUDY2025-1204
- Conditions
- Behavior, Eating
- Keywords
- nutrition labeling, menu labeling, Augmented reality (AR), Artificial intelligence (AI), Dietary behavior, Hispanic population, Chronic disease prevention, Obesity
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 242 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Texas A&M UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 17 Nov 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 18 May 2026 (actual)
- Study completion
- 18 May 2026 (actual)
- First posted
- 9 Jan 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study evaluates the impact of culturally tailored menu labeling interventions on psychosocial factors and ordering behavior among customers in two independently owned Hispanic restaurants in East-Central Texas. Participants will be exposed to one of three sequential menu conditions at each restaurant: (1) a standard menu without nutrition information, (2) a paper menu with bilingual nutrition labels, or (3) a digital menu app enhanced with Augmented Reality (AR) and Artificial Intelligence (AI) providing interactive nutrition guidance. The study will assess whether menu formats influence nutrition literacy, decision-making confidence, self-efficacy, attitudes, behavioral intentions, and actual ordering behavior. Data will be collected through surveys, purchase receipts, and app interaction logs.
Detailed description
Detailed Description:
This study aims to design and evaluate a culturally tailored, bilingual menu labeling intervention incorporating AR and AI features in small, independently owned Hispanic restaurants. The intervention seeks to promote informed food ordering by targeting psychosocial constructs known to influence food choice. Three sequential conditions will be implemented: (1) baseline with standard menus and no nutrition labels, (2) paper menus with visible bilingual nutrition labels, and (3) a digital AR/AI-enhanced menu.
Guided by the Theory of Planned Behavior and Social Cognitive Theory, the study focuses on constructs such as decision-making confidence, self-efficacy, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. The two primary objectives are to (1) develop a culturally informed digital menu labeling tool and (2) evaluate its effectiveness compared with standard and paper menu formats in shaping psychosocial factors and actual ordering behavior.
Participants will be recruited during restaurant visits and exposed to the menu condition corresponding to their visit timing. Surveys will be administered before ordering to assess psychosocial factors, label awareness, and behavioral intentions. A formative needs assessment conducted prior to implementation will ensure cultural and linguistic appropriateness. Findings will provide evidence on the effectiveness of innovative, theory-informed digital interventions in promoting informed food choices in culturally specific restaurant settings not subject to federal nutrition labeling requirements.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 3
- Model description
- This study uses a within-site, quasi-experimental design at two independently owned Hispanic restaurants. The intervention consists of three sequential conditions: (1) a baseline phase with the standard menu, (2) a paper menu phase featuring bilingual nutrition labels, and (3) a digital menu phase using a mobile app enhanced with augmented reality (AR) and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. Each condition enrolls distinct participants to compare the effects of different menu labeling formats on ordering behavior and psychosocial outcomes. The restaurants serve as their own controls, allowing for direct comparison of menu formats within the same real-world setting.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Baseline condition | No intervention | –Standard menu with no nutrition information. |
| Paper menu condition | Active comparator | Behavioral: Paper menuBilingual paper menus display numeric and icon-based nutrition information, including calories, saturated fat, and sodium. |
| AR/AI digital menu condition | Experimental | Behavioral: Digital menu conditionMobile app providing interactive nutrition information and personalized guidance based on dietary preferences. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Adults aged 18 years or older
- Patrons dining at participating Hispanic restaurants during designated study hours
- Able to read and speak English or Spanish
- Willing and able to provide informed consent
- Pregnant women are eligible to participate, as the study procedures pose minimal risk
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Minors under 18 years of age
- Individuals with visual or cognitive impairments that prevent interaction with the menu formats or AR/AI technology
- Individuals who have participated in a prior phase of the study
- Restaurant staff involved in study implementation
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Paper menuPaper menu with bilingual nutrition labels | Behavioural | Paper menu condition |
| Digital menu conditionAR/AI-enhanced digital menu giving interactive nutrition guidance | Behavioural | AR/AI digital menu condition |
Primary outcome
Attitudes Toward Healthy Menu Choices
Time frame: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Attitudes toward selecting healthier menu items, assessed using a study-developed questionnaire informed by the Theory of Planned Behavior. The questionnaire consists of agreement-scale items evaluating whether choosing healthier foods is important, beneficial, and enjoyable. Measurement Tool: Study-developed Attitudes Toward Healthy Menu Choices Questionnaire (5-point agreement Likert scale) Scale Description and Coding: 1. = Strongly disagree 2. = Disagree 3. = Neither agree nor disagree 4. = Agree 5. = Strongly agree Unit of Measure: Mean attitude score (range: 1 to 5) Scale Range and Direction: Scores range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate more positive attitudes toward choosing healthier menu items.
Intention to Make Healthier Food Choices
Time frame: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Intention to choose healthier menu items, assessed using a study-developed questionnaire informed by the Theory of Planned Behavior. Measurement Tool: Study-developed Healthy Eating Intention Questionnaire (5-point agreement Likert scale) Scale Description and Coding: 1. = Strongly disagree 2. = Disagree 3. = Neither agree nor disagree 4. = Agree 5. = Strongly agree Unit of Measure: Intention score (range: 1 to 5) Scale Range and Direction: Scores range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate stronger intention to choose healthier menu items.
Perceived Behavioral Control Over Healthy Menu Choices
Time frame: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Perceived behavioral control over choosing healthier menu items, assessed using a study-developed questionnaire informed by the Theory of Planned Behavior. Measurement Tool: Study-developed Perceived Behavioral Control Questionnaire (5-point agreement Likert scale) Scale Description and Coding: 1. = Strongly disagree 2. = Disagree 3. = Neither agree nor disagree 4. = Agree 5. = Strongly agree Unit of Measure: Perceived behavioral control score (range: 1 to 5) Scale Range and Direction: Scores range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate greater perceived control over choosing healthier menu items.
Self-Efficacy for Using Nutrition Information When Ordering
Time frame: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Self-efficacy for using nutrition information to guide food choices, assessed using a study-developed questionnaire informed by Social Cognitive Theory. Measurement Tool: Study-developed Nutrition Information Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (5-point agreement Likert scale) Scale Description and Coding: 1. = Strongly disagree 2. = Disagree 3. = Neither agree nor disagree 4. = Agree 5. = Strongly agree Unit of Measure: Mean self-efficacy score (range: 1 to 5) Scale Range and Direction: Scores range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate greater confidence in using nutrition information to make food choices.
Awareness of Nutrition Information on the Menu
Time frame: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Awareness of nutrition information on the menu, assessed using a study-developed self-report item asking whether the participant noticed or looked at nutrition information while viewing the menu. Measurement Tool: Study-developed Awareness of Nutrition Information Item (binary response) Scale Description and Coding: 0 = No, did not notice or look at nutrition information 1 = Yes, noticed or looked at nutrition information Unit of Measure: Percentage of participants reporting awareness (response = 1) Scale Range and Direction: Values range from 0 to 1. A value of 1 indicates awareness of nutrition information. How the Percentage Is Derived: The percentage is calculated as the proportion of participants with a response of 1 (Yes) among all participants who completed the questionnaire.
Use of Nutrition Information to Inform Menu Selection
Time frame: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Use of nutrition information to inform menu selection, assessed using a study-developed self-report item asking the extent to which nutrition information influenced the participant's food choice. Measurement Tool: Study-developed Nutrition Information Influence Item (5-point Likert scale) Scale Description and Coding: 1. = Not at all 2. = A little 3. = Somewhat 4. = Mostly 5. = Completely Unit of Measure: Percentage of participants reporting use of nutrition information, defined as responses of 4 or 5 Scale Range and Direction: Scores range from 1 to 5. Higher values indicate greater influence of nutrition information on choice. How the Percentage Is Derived: The percentage is calculated as the proportion of participants with responses of 4 or 5 among all participants who completed the questionnaire.
5 secondary outcomes
Total Energy Ordered per Customer Order
Time frame: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Saturated Fat Content of Menu Items Ordered
Time frame: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Sodium Content of Menu Items Ordered
Time frame: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Dietary Fiber Content of Menu Items Ordered
Time frame: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Added Sugar Content of Menu Items Ordered
Time frame: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 9 Jul 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. De-identified individual participant data (IPD) underlying the results reported in the publication will be shared, including baseline characteristics, outcome measures, and adverse event data. Data will be available beginning 6 months after publication for researchers who provide a methodologically sound proposal. Requests should be submitted to the corresponding author and will require a data use agreement in accordance with institutional and regulatory policies.
Related trials for Behavior, Eating
RecruitingObservational study
Evaluation of National Highly Specialized Care for Adults With Treatment-Resistant Self-Harm and Eating Disorders: Substudy 1
Self-harm Behavior, Eating Disorders
Recruiting
Implementing an Interdisciplinary Eating Disorder Screening and Treatment Program for Post-Bariatric Surgery Patients in Nova Scotia
Bariatric Surgery Patients, Disordered Eating Behaviors
Not yet recruiting
Investigating Dynamic Hedonic Responses to Food During Consumption
Eating Behaviors
RecruitingObservational study
Children s Growth and Behavior Study
Obesity, Eating Behaviors
Recruiting
The Combined Effects of Energy Density and Variety on Intake
Eating Behaviors
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Hyunjung Lee, PhD principal investigator
Department of Nutrition, Texas A&M University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Paper menu and Digital menu condition in people with Behavior, Eating, run by Texas A&M University at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 9 Jul 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Attitudes Toward Healthy Menu Choices (time frame: Immediately after the intervention (menu exposure)). The study lists 6 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 9 Jul 2026; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 27 Oct 2026.